MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128534634 · doi:10.5539/ies.v14n2p12

Examination of Latent Test Anxiety Profiles in a Sample of U.S. Adolescents

2021· article· en· W3128534634 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patricia A. Lowe

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyPsychologyTest anxietyTest (biology)Clinical psychologyLatent class modelDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study examined latent test anxiety profiles in a sample of 592 U.S. adolescents in grades 6-12 using latent profile analysis (LPA). The adolescents were administered a multidimensional measure of test anxiety in their schools. The results of LPA indicated that a three-profile test anxiety model provided the best fitting model. The three latent test anxiety subgroups were named low, medium, and high test anxiety. In addition, grade-level and gender were added as covariates to the model and LPA was performed again. Grade-level and gender were found to differentially predict membership in the latent test anxiety subgroups, with females more likely to be in the high latent test anxiety subgroup than in the medium and low latent test anxiety subgroups and middle school students were more likely to be in the high latent test anxiety subgroup than in the low latent test anxiety subgroup. Middle school students were also more likely to be in the medium latent test anxiety subgroup than in the low latent test anxiety subgroup. Implications for the development of measures, treatment, and prevention of test anxiety in the U.S. adolescent population are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207