MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971783642 · doi:10.17759/pse.2019240403

Mindfulness in Orphan and Parentless Adolescents as a Factor of Psychological Well-Being

2019· article· en· W2971783642 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tatiana I. Shulga

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Science and Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulnessPsychologySelf-compassionClinical psychologyPsychological resilienceEmpathyPsychological interventionPsychological well-beingCognitionDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapistSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article presents a study of mindfulness as a feature of consciousness in orphan and parentless adolescents. The adolescents’ mindfulness is analysed through their awareness of the ability to achieve positive psychological effects, including psychological well-being and resilience. The study employed the following 9 techniques: the Child and Adolescent Mindfulness Measure (CAMM); the Resilience Scale; the Self-Compassion Scale; the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire; the Ryff’s Psychological Well-Being Scale; the Gratitude Questionnaire; the Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire; the scales for measuring readiness to help and aggression in the classroom; the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ).The sample included 20 orphan and parentless adolescents. The study revealed that mindfulness is indeed a factor of psychological well-being. The educators of twenty organizations for orphans and children without parental care assessed the adolescents’ strengths and difficulties in order to evaluate their cognitive emotion regulation abilities.Сorrelation analysis allowed us to identify the relationship of mindfulness, psychological well-being indicators and emotional regulation with a number of social psychological characteristics of personality in the adolescents: indicators of positive psychological effects of mindfulness, in particular, humanity, resilience, competence (environmental management), and decrease of cognitive and emotional reactivity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.412 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological Science and EducationSame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207