Mattering Versus Self-Esteem in University Students: Associations With Regulatory Focus, Social Feedback, and Psychological Distress
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although research has established that feelings of not mattering are associated with distress, the factors and processes that contribute to these associations have not received much consideration. The current study was conducted to address three themes. First, mattering was evaluated from a motivational perspective by examining mattering and regulatory focus. Second, the uniqueness of low mattering in predicting distress was investigated when considered along with other predictors (i.e., self-esteem and regulatory focus). Finally, a negative inferential style involving perceptions of negative social feedback was tested as a cognitive mediator of the link between mattering and distress. Mattering was correlated moderately with a promotion self-regulation focus. Regression analyses showed that mattering was also linked uniquely with distress beyond the variance predicted by self-esteem and regulatory focus. In addition, the association between low mattering and distress was mediated by negative social feedback. Our findings highlight the need for further investigation of mattering as a unique contributor to distress and the factors associated with mattering.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it