Adjusting to college—Do ability beliefs and confidence in getting support matter for performance and mental health?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Entering college, students are required to adjust to a new academic and social environment. During the COVID-19 pandemic, social interactions with peers and faculty were limited to online settings and access to campus resources was restricted. Hence, students who entered college in fall 2020 began their freshman year under particularly challenging circumstances. We used data from two freshman cohorts, who started college either before or during the pandemic. We investigated to what extent mid-quarter academic and social adjustment (i.e., ability beliefs and confidence in getting support) predicted end-of-quarter performance, psychological distress, and satisfaction of freshman students. Results showed that students who started college during the pandemic were less confident they could get support by peers in the middle of their first quarter. Furthermore, students from the second cohort reported higher psychological distress and lower satisfaction with their adjustment at the end of their first quarter. Results showed that ability beliefs played an important role for end-of-quarter performance, whereas confidence in getting support was more relevant for psychological well-being outcomes in both cohorts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".