MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110342442 · doi:10.52006/main.v3i1.124

Spiritual Well-Being and Resiliency of the Diocesan Seminarians of Antique

2020· article· en· W3110342442 on OpenAlexaff
Eric L. Legada, Dennis V. Madrigal, Ma. Wilma M. Maravilla

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilippine Social Science Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsSt. Peter's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntiquePsychologySpiritualityScale (ratio)Meaning (existential)Psychological resilienceSocial psychologyClinical psychologyPsychotherapistMedicineAlternative medicineHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spiritual well-being is integral in seeking meaning and purpose in life. Related to this is resiliency, which is a dynamic attribute of bouncing back from difficult situations. Thus, this descriptive-correlational study determines the degree of spiritual well-being and the level of resiliency of the diocesan seminarians of Antique. Spiritual Well-being Scale and Resilience Scale standardized tests were used. The findings indicate that the degree of spiritual well-being of seminarians is high which indicates that the seminarians possess a certain degree of satisfaction and manifest a clear sense of purpose in life. On the other hand, the level of resiliency of the diocesan seminarians of Antique is "on the low end" which signifies that as a whole, they might be experiencing some depression and anxiety in their lives. Finally, there is a significant relationship between spirituality and resiliency. The study recommends designing an enhanced career guidance program for the formation of the seminarians.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilippine Social Science JournalSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207