Creative Self-Efficacy and Its' Relationship to Intellectual Stress among Gifted Students at the Jubilee School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current study aimed at exploring Creative self-efficacy and its' relationship to intellectual stress among gifted students at jubilee school. Study sample consists of (N=100) of secondary intermediate stage students, Al-Zoubi scale (2014) to measure intellectual stress and Abbott scale (2010) to measure creative self-efficacy were used by researchers. Results reported that creative self-efficacy with its' two dimensions: creative thinking and creative performance among gifted students was in high degree, while intellectual stress level was in moderate degree. Study results also showed that no statistical differences attributed to class and sex variables, study revealed an inverse correlation between study dimensions, whenever efficacy increased in creative thinking and creative performance, intellectual stress is decreasing. Researchers recommend the importance of training gifted students' teachers on developing creative performance and thinking among gifted students, and provision therapeutic and counseling programs to decrease any psychological or intellectual stresses by holding workshops that expand enrichment and knowledge sides among teachers and gifted students.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".