MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404245086 · doi:10.1080/15298868.2024.2426565

Profiles of goal adjustment capacities are differentially associated with perfectionism, excellencism, and psychological adjustment of students in a time of crisis

2024· article· en· W4404245086 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSelf and Identity · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsPsychologyPerfectionism (psychology)Social psychologyGoal settingDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Students had to adjust their goals during the sudden shift to online teaching amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. This study with 613 university students identified four multidimensional profiles based on how they relied on goal disengagement, reengagement, and perseverative engagement (a new dimension of goal adjustment capacities). Students who disengaged from goals, reengaged in new ones, and were less likely to dwell on their former goals (goal reengagement profile) experienced less stress and burnout and more growth experiences. Students who reengaged less in goals (goal entrapment profile) and those who reengaged but dwelled on their former goals (action crisis profile) experienced worse psychological outcomes. Perfectionists were more likely than excellence strivers to be part of an action crisis goal adjustment profile.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.288 · 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