MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021276957 · doi:10.1177/0956797620904451

Reframing Achievement Setbacks: A Motivation Intervention to Improve 8-Year Graduation Rates for Students in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Fields

2020· article· en· W3021276957 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeremy M. Hamm, Raymond P. Perry, Judith G. Chipperfield, Steve Hladkyj, Patti C. Parker, Bernard Weiner

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGraduation (instrument)Cognitive reframingIntervention (counseling)PsychologyPsychological interventionMedical educationOddsAt-risk studentsMathematics educationAcademic achievementCourseworkAttributionMedicineSocial psychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite increased emphasis on educating students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines, nearly half of U.S. college students who enroll in these programs fail to graduate with STEM degrees. Using archival data from the Motivation and Academic Achievement Database, we tested whether a motivation intervention to reframe causal attributions for academic setbacks improved graduation rates for college students in STEM disciplines ( N = 496). Results showed that the intervention increased the odds of 8-year graduation for students who were at risk of college dropout. Findings highlight the potential of theory-informed psychological interventions to increase persistence to graduation for at-risk students in STEM fields.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations38
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ScienceSame topicEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessFrench-language works237,207