Self-esteem of the ambition of Russian and Turkmen students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article presents the results of a cross-cultural study of self-assessment of ambition of Russian and Turkmen students. The purpose of the study is to identify the features of self-esteem of ambition and the degree of its expression among students from different countries. The research was carried out using the questionnaire "Ambition" (OV Barsukova). The study involved 166 students aged 17-19 years: 94 Russian students and 72 Turkmen students. The majority of Russian students consider themselves to be more ambitious than ambitious people (48.94%), about a quarter of Russian students consider themselves to be unambitious people (25.53%), and a fifth - more un ambitious than ambitious people (21.28%) ), the minimum number - by undemanding people (4.26%). Most of the Russian students rate their ambition as moderate (51.056%), the minimum part of the students - as low (12.77%). On the whole, Russian students consider themselves ambitious rather than undemanding people and rate their ambition as moderate. The overwhelming majority of Turkmen students consider themselves to be ambitious people (83.33%), an insignificant part of students consider themselves to be more ambitious people than unambitious (11.11%) and undemanding people (5.56%). The majority of Turkmen students rate their ambition as high (61.11%), just over a quarter of them - as low (27.78%), the minimum number - as moderate (11.11%). In general, Turkmen students consider themselves ambitious and rate their ambition as high. A comparative analysis of the self-esteem of the ambition of Russian and Turkmen students was revealed according to the following indicators: the assessment of oneself as ambitious people prevails among Turkmen students, the assessment of oneself as people who are more ambitious than undemanding people prevails among Russian students, and the assessment of their ambition as moderate prevails among Russian 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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".