Investigating Current Academic Stress and Test Anxiety for Undergraduate Students Experiencing the Covid-19 Pandemic of 2020
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Around the world, students of all ages are becoming increasingly stressed. Academic stress and test anxiety are two aspects of education-based stress that have been studied since the 1980s. Despite attempts to identify myriad predictors and to develop interventions that can mitigate these two educational impediments, undergraduate students continue to report high levels of stress. The current study was an opportunistic study that investigated the effect of the Coronavirus 2020 pandemic on academic stress and test anxiety among 200 undergraduate students at two primarily undergraduate institutions (PUIs) with different ethnic and SES compositions. The study also assessed the influence of the presence of a pet on reported academic stress and test anxiety levels. No difference was found between levels of academic stress or test anxiety for students evaluated before the pandemic began, when transitioning to a pandemic status, or during the pandemic with quarantine in effect. Moreover, the presence of a pet did not mediate the self-reported levels for either academic stress or test anxiety. However, academic stress and test anxiety levels were at an all-time high compared to previous cohorts assessed across multiple decades with females showing a greater vulnerability in both areas of stress. These results highlight the critical importance of identifying factors that are driving these stressors and developing effective interventions for undergraduate students to manage their stress levels.
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 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 | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it