MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412065847 · doi:10.61796/icossh.v2i3.94

THE INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL SUPPORT AND SPIRITUALITY WITH QUARTER LIFE CRISIS IN PRISONERS

2025· article· en· W4412065847 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sugianti, Lely Ika Mariyati

Bibliographic record

VenueProceeding of International Conference on Social Science and Humanity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)SpiritualityPsychologyHistoryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This research aims to determine the relationship between emotional intelligence and self-control in high school/vocational school students who are members of the Youth Information and Counseling Center (PIK-R) organization. Method: This research uses a quantitative approach with a correlational survey design. The research sample consisted of 228 students aged 15-18 years who were active in PIK-R in the last 6 months. The sampling used is purposive sampling. Data was collected using two measurement scales, namely the Emotional Intelligence scale consisting of 30 items with a reliability (α) of 0.813, and the Self-Control Scale consisting of 30 items with a reliability (α) of 0.748. Data analysis was carried out by Spearman's Rho correlation test using SPSS software version 25. Results: The results of the research showed a significant correlation between Self-Control and Emotional Intelligence of High School/Vocational High School Students with PIK-R (r=0.724*** p0.724). There were results that emotional intelligence had an effective contribution to self-control of R2 = 0.525, suggesting that emotional intelligence explained 52.5% of the self-control variance. Novelty: This research aims to determine the relationship between emotional intelligence and self-control in high school/vocational school students who are members of the Youth Information and Counseling Center (PIK-R) organization.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceeding of International Conference on Social Science and HumanitySame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207