THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RESILIENCE AND THE LEVEL OF QUARTER LIFE CRISIS IN COLLEGE STUDENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to examine the correlation between students' levels of resilience and the severity of their quarter-life crisis. Method: Utilizing a quantitative correlational design, the research involved 160 students from STIKES Majapahit Mojokerto, selected through a saturation sampling technique. Data were collected using validated scales on resilience and quarter-life crisis, and analyzed using Pearson correlation. Results: The findings indicate a statistically significant negative correlation between resilience and quarter-life crisis (r = -0.260, p < 0.05), suggesting that higher levels of resilience are associated with lower levels of quarter-life crisis among students. Novelty: This study contributes to the limited body of research that addresses the protective role of resilience during early adulthood, particularly among students in Indonesia who are navigating the critical transition into the workforce and independent adulthood. While the quarter-life crisis is a well-known construct in developmental psychology, this research uniquely highlights resilience as a key mitigating factor in this specific cultural and developmental context.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".