The Relative Contribution of Psychological Empowerment, Academic Persistence, and Future Orientation in Predicting Academic Adjustment among Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the relationship between psychological empowerment, academic persistence, future orientation, and academic adjustment in adolescents. As well as revealing the presence of gender and age differences in these variables. The study also aimed to determine whether psychological empowerment, academic persistence, and future orientation contribute to predicting academic adjustment. A total of 180 adolescents’ students in grades 7 through 11 from some public middle and high schools in Kafr El-Sheikh city, Egypt, were included in the study. Scales of psychological empowerment, academic persistence, future orientation, and academic adjustment were used to collect data. The given data was examined using the appropriate statistical tests. The findings revealed a positive correlation between the studied variables. The findings also showed no differences in psychological empowerment, academic persistence, future orientation, or academic adjustment between males and females. In addition, there were no significant differences between students in middle and high school in psychological empowerment, whereas differences were found in academic persistence, future orientation, and academic adjustment in favor of high school students. Finally, the findings indicated the contribution of psychological empowerment, academic persistence, and future orientation in predicting academic adjustment. Some recommendations and suggestions were provided, considering the 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".