MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313059555 · doi:10.24042/ajp.v5i1.13985

Hubungan Antara Harapan Dengan Quarter Life Crisis Pada Mahasiswa Yang Mengalami Toxic Relationship

2022· article· en· W4313059555 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nugroho Arief Setiawan, Alfia Zahrotu Milati

Bibliographic record

VenueANFUSINA Journal of Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Nonprobability samplingPsychologyPopulationDemographySociologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quarter life crisis is an emotional crisis experienced by individuals who are in the transition phase from adolescence to early adulthood (emerging adulthood). Students as individuals in their early adulthood need to have a solution in order to properly deal with this quarter life crisis period. Hope can reduce distress and foster a positive effect. The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between hope and quarter life crisis in students who experience toxic relationships. The population in this study were students of the State Islamic University of Raden Intan Lampung. The sampling technique used is purposive sampling. The sample in this study amounted to 92 respondents. The measuring tools used are the quarter life crisis scale and the expectation scale. The analysis technique used is product moment correlation with the help of IBM SPSS ver 25 software for windows. The results showed that the majority of students were in the moderate category of quarter life crisis where women were higher than men. The expectation variable shows that the expectations that students have are mostly in the moderate category, both are in the same category. The results of the analysis show that expectations have a significant negative effect on the quarter life crisis (R= -0.431, R Square= 0.185, p 0.01), which means that the higher the expectation, the lower the quarter life crisis experienced. And conversely, the lower the expectation, the higher the quarter life crisis experienced. Judging from the value of R Square, the expectation has an effect of 18.5% on the quarter life crisis, and the other 81.5% is influenced by other variables outside the study.Key Word: Hope, Quarter Life Crisis, Toxic Relationship

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueANFUSINA Journal of PsychologySame topicEducational Methods and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207