MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315630648 · doi:10.30762/happiness.v6i2.552

Telaah Literatur Sistematis Intervensi Dalam Usaha Meminimalisir Quarter Life Crisis

2022· article· en· W4315630648 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gunawan Wibisono, Zun Azizul Hakim

Bibliographic record

VenueHappiness Journal of Psychology and Islamic Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Psychological interventionPsychologyMedicineGerontologyPsychiatryHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early adulthood is the transition period from adolescence to adulthood. This is a complex transitional phase. There are so many stressors that lead to various difficulties, which cause individuals to feel trapped and lose their way into adulthood. This condition is known as a quarter-life crisis which is a common phenomenon that occurs between the ages of 18 to 30. The purpose of this study is to examine various alternative interventions that can be used to minimize quarter-life crises in early adulthood. The method used in this research is a systematic literature review. Researchers chose 7 out of 13 articles found on the Google Scholar search engine in the 2011-2021 timeframe. Interventions for quarter-life crises are carried out both preventively and curatively. Domination interventions that have been studied by previous researchers are mostly curative. The number of research subjects involved in the study varied from 2 respondents to 531 respondents. The research methods used also vary, both in the form of qualitative and quantitative research (experiments). This shows that research on interventions for quarter-life crises is still developing and open to new findings.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.005

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHappiness Journal of Psychology and Islamic ScienceSame topicEducational Methods and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207