MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214548516 · doi:10.1080/00461520.2021.1985501

Teacher emotions in the classroom and their implications for students

2021· article· en· W3214548516 on OpenAlexaff
Anne C. Frenzel, Lia M. Daniels, Irena Burić

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Psychologist · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCommunication in Education and Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationPsychologyValence (chemistry)Empirical researchScope (computer science)Social psychologyPedagogyMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present contribution provides a conceptualization of teacher emotions rooted in appraisal theory and draws on several complementary theoretical perspectives to create a conceptual framework for understanding the teacher emotion–student outcome link based on three psychological mechanisms: (1) direct transmission effects between teacher and student emotions, (2) mediated effects via teachers’ instructional and relational teaching behaviors, and (3) recursive effects back from student outcomes on teacher emotions, both directly and indirectly via teachers’ appraisals of student outcomes and their correspondingly adapted teaching behaviors. We then present a tour d’horizon of empirical evidence from this field of research, highlighting valence-congruent links in which positive emotions relate to desirable outcomes and negative emotions to undesirable outcomes, but also valence-incongruent links. Last, we identify two key challenges for teacher emotion impact research and suggest three directions for future research that focus on measurement, research design, and an extended scope considering emotion regulation.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations420
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational PsychologistSame topicCommunication in Education and HealthcareFrench-language works237,207