Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to "compare goal orientation, academic achievement and self-regulation (motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning strategies) among MA students of psychology with related and unrelated bachelor's degrees.In doing so, multi-stage random sampling was used to identify all the branches of Islamic Azad University in districts 8 and 12 offering an MA in psychology.Then, three universities were randomly selected through stratified disproportionate sampling (gender as a stratum) and using a formula based on confidence interval, 200 MA students of psychology (100 students with related BAs and 100 students with unrelated BAs) were selected as sample members.To collect the data, the Achievement Goals Questionnaire (AGQ) developed by Elliot and McGregor and Motivational Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) were used with the average scores of students in the previous semester.For data analysis, descriptive and inferential statistics (i.e.MANOVA and t-test) were employed.The results of the multivariate analysis of variance showed that there is a significant difference between the components of motivational beliefs in these two groups and a significant difference was found between their academic achievements.As such, the mean value of motivational beliefs and academic achievement is higher in students with irrelevant BAs.Moreover, no significant difference was found between the components of selfregulated learning strategies and goal orientation in any of these groups.Conclusion: The goal orientation of the MA students of psychology is mainly mastery-oriented and they use self-regulated learning strategies.What has contributed to this increase in the academic achievement of the group with irrelevant BAs includes motivational beliefs, emotional responses, intrinsic interest, and beliefs regarding work value.This can be attributed to the appeal of the academic field and the novelty of educational materials for these students.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.991 | 0.992 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".