The Relationship Between Awareness and Attitudes Towards Research and Developments and Academic Motivation Levels in Nursing Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to determine the relationship between nursing students’ awareness and attitudes towards research and developments and their academic motivation levels. This descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out with students from nursing department of faculty of health sciences of a university in Turkey (n=460). Data were collected using the questionnaire form which included the socio-demographic characteristics of those students, “Nursing Students’ Attitudes to and Awareness of Research and Development within Nursing Scale” and “Academic Motivation Scale”. Data were analyzed using percentage, mean, Pearson’s correlation analysis, Student’s t, and One Way Anova tests. The mean age of the students was 20.56±1.52. 81.1% were female and 28.7% were in their first year. The average score of the Nursing Students’ Attitudes to and Awareness of Research and Development within Nursing Scale was 120.54±17.46. The students’ mean score on intrinsic motivation subscale was 57.20±13.45, on extrinsic motivation subscale was 61.96±11.50 and on amotivation subscale was 10.12±5.87 in Academic Motivation Scale. The level of the students’ awareness and attitudes towards research and developments has a positive correlation with the levels of their intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and a negative correlation with the level of their amotivation (p<0.05). The average score of the Nursing Students’ Attitudes to and Awareness of Research and Development within Nursing Scale were statistically significantly different in the gender, the status of their following scientific publications and the positions they wanted to work after graduation (p<0.05). It has been determined that the students have high level of awareness and attitudes towards research and development, and their academic motivation levels affect their awareness and attitudes towards research and development.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".