MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412409784 · doi:10.25077/jsa.11.1.35-48.2025

Tindakan Refleksif Mahasiswa Tingkat Akhir dalam Menghadapi Quarter Life Crisis

2025· article· en· W4412409784 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chika Prista Prameswari, Diana Dewi Saftika, Elita Aidillah, Gita Isyanawulan

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Sosiologi Andalas · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Education and Societal Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Political sciencePsychologyHumanitiesPhilosophyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research focuses on the quarter-life crisis problem caused by having finished studying at university but being confused about choices for the future, also due to demands from the surrounding environment regarding the economic sector and also due to academic stress. The more often you experience pressure, the more likely an individual will start to develop negative emotions and views of themselves. Final-year students often experience negative feelings such as confusion, insecurity about their own abilities, and feelings of depression and loss of hope for the future. The aim of this research is to analyze the reflexivity of final-year students in facing the quarter-life crisis. This research uses descriptive research methods with a purposive selection of informants analyzed using Ulrich Beck's Risk Society theory. The quarter-life crisis that final-year students are at risk of experiencing is influenced by awareness of the future, which causes feelings of anxiety, overload, feeling burdened, and feeling left behind by others. Then, the research results also show that to face risks in the future, final-year students carry out reflexivity by improving their skills and also participating in organizations, training, or internships. Social class is also a supporting factor for student reflexivity, but not the main one. Because they have unlimited access, the upper and upper middle classes have better opportunities for reflexivity than the lower and lower middle classes. And social support is also very necessary when final-year students practice reflexivity.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.350
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 designQualitative
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 venueJurnal Sosiologi AndalasSame topicYouth Education and Societal DynamicsFrench-language works237,207