Motivations for social withdrawal and academic adjustment in emerging adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract While social withdrawal in childhood is typically associated with lower academic functioning, little is known about how motivations for social withdrawal may be connected to academic adjustment in emerging adulthood. The purpose of the present study was to examine associations between social withdrawal motivations (i.e., shyness, avoidance and unsociability) and indices of academic adjustment, including academic achievement (i.e., grade point average [GPA]) and academic motivation (i.e., intrinsic value, self‐efficacy and test anxiety), while accounting for gender and conscientiousness. Participants were 623 emerging adults between the ages of 18 and 25 ( M age = 20.15, SD = 1.67; 79% female) who were currently attending university. Hierarchical regression results showed that shyness was negatively associated with intrinsic value and self‐efficacy. Whereas shyness was positively associated with test anxiety, avoidance was negatively associated with test anxiety. Social withdrawal motivations were not associated with GPA. The findings suggest that some motivations for social withdrawal play a role in university students’ academic motivation, but not their academic achievement.
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".