Connection Loneliness and Emotion Regulation with Quarter Life Crisis in Adolescents in Gresik
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Teenagers are often described as agents of change who certainly have their own challenges and needs. This means that people who have reached adulthood must be ready to face the social world. If a person feels unable to cope with the changes and challenges that arise, they may develop negative reactions or emotional crises within themselves. Quarter life crisis is what people experience in response to instability, distrust, fear of failure, isolation, constant change, multiple choices, and also fear of impotence. Purpose: The aim of this research is to reveal the relationship between Loneliness (X1) and emotion regulation (X2) with the quarter life crisis (Y) in Adolescents in Gresik. Methods: This research is a quantitative study with a cross-sectional approach. This is done to test a predetermined hypothesis. This research uses a cross-sectional study, which means that data on the independent and dependent variables are each collected and observed only once . There were 468 populations and researchers involved 215 students of the Faculty of Health, Muhammadiyah University of Gresik, the sample was obtained randomly. Results: There is no relationship between loneliness and emotion regulation with quarter life crisis. And no p-value results were obtained in the statistical test of the correlation of Emotion Regulation with Quarter Life Crisis and a p-value of 0.5 (>0.05) was obtained, which means there is no relationship between loneliness and quarter life crisis. Conclusion: There is no relationship between loneliness and emotion regulation with quarter-life crisis. The occurrence of quarter-life crisis can be due to external factors such as work, social pressure, or changes in lifestyle, not just individual psychological factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".