MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W41922593

Pengaruh Kopi Terhadap Kewaspadaan Pada Pria Dewasa

2009· dissertation· id· W41922593 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jansen Laory

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsHumanitiesArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kewaspadaan dibutuhkan hampir dalam semua aktivitas sehari-hari kita, baik belajar, bermain, maupun bekerja, terutama pada pekerjaan yang menuntut kewaspadaan tinggi, seperti pengendara kendaraan bermotor. Dengan konsentrasi optimal, kewaspadaan dapat ditingkatkan. Kopi merupakan salah satu minuman yang paling banyak dikonsumsi oleh hampir seluruh masyarakat di dunia, bahkan melebihi minuman soda. Para pelajar dan pekerja meminum kopi untuk membantu meningkatkan kewaspadaan, sebab kopi dapat meningkatkan konsentrasi. Penelitian di Universitas Alberta, USA membuktikan bahwa kopi meningkatkan konsentrasi dan kewaspadaan. Tujuan penelitian untuk mengetahui pengaruh kopi terhadap kewaspadaan pada pria dewasa. Penelitian dilakukan terhadap 30 orang subjek penelitian berusia 18-25 tahun. Kewaspadaan dites menggunakan Jhonson Pascal Test, dengan mencocokkan huruf-huruf dalam dua tabel. Data yang diukur adalah waktu yang dibutuhkan untuk mencocokkan huruf-huruf dalam dua tabel tersebut ditambah tiga kali banyaknya kesalahan. Analisis data menggunakan uji “t” berpasangan dengan α = 0,05. Hasil penelitian, rata-rata waktu yang dibutuhkan setelah minum kopi 107,7667 detik, hasil ini lebih singkat dibandingkan rata-rata waktu yang dibutuhkan sebelum minum kopi yaitu 131,1 detik, yang perbedaannya sangat signifikan (p = 0,000). Kopi dapat meningkatkan kewaspadaan pada pria dewasa.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.005

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.358 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducational Methods and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207