The Relationships Between Internet Addiction, Social Appearance Anxiety and Coping with Stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine internet addiction in terms of social appearance anxiety and strategies for coping with stress. The dependent variable of the research is internet addiction, and its independent variables are social appearance anxiety and strategies for coping with stress. The study group of the research consists of 481 undergraduate and postgraduate students as 318 women (66.1%) and 163 men (33.9%). In order to collect data in the study, Short Version of Young’s Internet Addiction Test, The Social Appearance Anxiety Scale, The Stress Coping Strategy Scale, and Personal Information Form were used. Descriptive statistics, correlation and multiple regression analysis were used to analyze the data. A positive relationship was found between internet addiction and social appearance anxiety of university students. While there is a positive relationship between submissive approach and helpless approach, which are the subscale of coping strategies, and internet addiction of university students, there is a negative relationship between self-confident approach and optimistic approach. The results of the research revealed that the submissive approach and self-confident approach, which are the subscale in for coping with stress, social appearance anxiety are predictive of internet addiction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".