MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409412839 · doi:10.1080/07448481.2025.2490074

Heading to university with(out) a best friend: attachment anxiety, changes to best friendships and adjustment to first-year university

2025· article· en· W4409412839 on OpenAlexafffund
Katya F. Kredl, Tara K. MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American College Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnxietyPsychologyHeading (navigation)College healthFriendshipDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyApplied psychologyMedicineNursingPsychiatryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We examined the links among attachment anxiety, coming to university with or without a best friend, forming new friendships, and adjustment to university. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: = 303, 92% women) completed surveys about their experiences with their best friend (i.e., forming new friendships, coming to university with/without a best friend), their adjustment to university and their attachment orientations. RESULTS: We found a significant relationship among attachment anxiety, perceiving best friends making new friends and the location of best friends, predicting both openness to new friendships and general well-being. Having a best friend who did not make new friends during the transition to university was associated with poorer adjustment, and this was heightened for those high in attachment anxiety and in the same location as their best friend. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that anxious attachment and experiences in best friendships play a critical role in the adjustment to university.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of American College HealthSame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207