Undergraduate Students' Stress Level during the Spread of COVID-19 Situation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to study and compare stress level during the COVID-19 situation of undergraduate students with different gender and year levels. The sample were 276 undergraduate students in the 2nd semester of the academic year 2020, being selected by voluntary sampling. The tool was the stress level in the situation of the Coronavirus disease 2019 measurement form with online system Google from. The frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, including hypothesis testing using One-Way ANOVA were analyzed as the statistics. The finding showed that: 1) Undergraduate students’ stress level during the COVID-19 situation, almost of 118 students was a high level of stress, representing 42.75%, followed by severe level of stress, 107 students, representing 38.77%. The moderate level of stress was 45 students, representing 16.30%, and the low level of stress was 6 students, representing for 2.17%. 2) There was statistically significant different of stress level during the COVID-19 situation of students with different gender (p < .05). Female students’ stress level was higher than male students. There was no different of stress level during the COVID-19 situation of students with different year levels.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".