Mindfulness Based Cognitive Theraphy: Lowering The Quarter Life Crisis in Achieving Happiness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to determine whether there is a decrease in the behavior of the quarter-life crisis to achieve happiness after being given the Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy method. Using a quantitative experimental approach and the research design used is Static Group Comparison. The aim is to measure the effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy in this study to the experimental group. Subjects are 30 people who are experiencing a quarter-life crisis. The technique of data analysis is statistical analysis, namely Paired sample T-test. Salam's research shows: (1) There is a significant difference in the quarter-life crisis after being given Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy with Paired Sample T-Test with p = 0.000 (p less than 0.05). (2) There is no significant difference in the quarter-life crisis on the subject before and before being given mindfulness-based cognitive therapy with the Paired Sample T-Test with a p-value = 0.741 (p more than 0.05). Abstrak: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah terdapat penurunan perilaku quarter life crisis untuk mencapai kebahagiaan setelah diberikan metode Mindfulness Based Cognitive Theraphy. Desain penelitian yang digunakan adalah true experimental design. Tujuannya adalah untuk mengukur efektivitas Mindfullnes Based Cognitive Theraphy dari penelitian ini terhadap kelompok eksperimen. Subjek 30 orang yang sedang mengalami quarter life crisis. Teknik analisa data adalah analisis statistik yaitu Paired sampel T-test. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan: (1) Ada yang signifikan perbedaan quarter life crisis setelah diberikan Mindfulness Based Cognitive Theraphy dengan Paired Sample T-Test hasil nilai p = 0.000 (p kurang dari 0.05). (2) Tidak ada perbedaan yang signifikan quarter life crisis pada subjek sebelum dan sesudah tidak diberikan perlakuan mindfulness based cognitive therapy dengan Paired Sample T-Test hasil nilai p = 0.741 (p kurang dari 0.05).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".