The Relationship between College Students' Social Adaptation and Aloneliness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is intended to investigate the relationship between social adaptation and aloneliness of college students through the actual investigation of college students, in order to provide evidence for enhancing the mental health level of college students and reducing their aloneliness. A total of 649 college students were selected as subjects to investigate their social adaptation and aloneliness by questionnaire. The results showed that: (1) Interpersonal adaptability, psychological resilience, psychological energy and Sense of psychological advantage were significantly negatively correlated with aloneliness. (2) Gender had significant differences in interpersonal adaptability and aloneliness; There are significant differences in the Sense of psychological advantage, psychological energy and social adaptation. There are significant differences in the Sense of psychological advantage, psychological energy, interpersonal adaptability, psychological resilience, social adaptation and aloneliness. (3) Social adaptation has a negative predictive effect on aloneliness. This study not only explores the relationship between social adaptation and aloneliness, but also provides empirical support and theoretical guidance for guiding college students to reduce aloneliness more targeted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".