The Relationship between Personality Traits, Academic Self-Efficacy and Academic Adaptation among University Students in Jordan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study investigates the relationship between personality traits according to the big five personality factors model, academic self-efficacy and academic adaptation among Hashemite University students in light of gender and specialization. The purposive sample consisted of 546 under graduated students, 258 males and 306 females. Three scales are used: the Five Factor Model (FFM), for academic self-efficacy and for academic adaption. The results show statistically significant differences in the average of participants’ degrees attributed to efficacy and academic adaption in favor of females and scientific specializations. They also show that agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness to experience, extroversion and neuroticism are most common among university students, with a statistically significant positive correlation between extroversion, openness to experience, academic self-efficacy and academic adaption and a negative correlation between neuroticism, conscientiousness, academic self-efficacy and academic adaption. No correlation was found between agreeableness and these two variables.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".