MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306840959 · doi:10.32674/jcihe.v14i4.3425

The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Ontario International Graduate Students: An Auto-Ethnography

2022· article· en· W4306840959 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rakha Zabin, Sandra Bosacki, John Novak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative & International Higher Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotional intelligenceEmpathyMindfulnessCreativityPsychologyEthnographySocial psychologyPower (physics)Graduate studentsValue (mathematics)PedagogyApplied psychologySociologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emotional Intelligence (EQ) is a multifaceted ability that helps us to sense, understand, value, and effectively apply the power of emotions as a source of information, trust, creativity, and influence (Goleman, 2006; Salovey, Caruso, & Cherkasskiy, 2011). The five components (self-awareness, self-regulation, empathy, motivation, and social skill) embedded within EQ may work solely or collectively and may individuals cope with everyday life events. Such an emotional tool kit may help multicultural international students to help cope with several adverse situations. The focus of this study was to provide an auto-ethnographic account of a female university student’s experiences as she transitions to become a full-time international graduate student in an Ontario university. The author reflects on the hurdles and socio-emotional challenges experienced during the transition to becoming a graduate student in Ontario. Overall, based on the student’s experiences, findings suggest the need for Canadian universities to incorporate multiple components of EQ into their international university services, including mindfulness, self-regulation, and stress management.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative & International Higher EducationSame topicEmotional Intelligence and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207