Dispositional Mindfulness and University Adjustment: The Mediating Role of Coping Self-Efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Academic and personal-emotional adjustment to university are important for students’ success. Dispositional mindfulness is known to be associated with academic and personal-emotional adjustment. However, less is known about the underlying mechanisms explaining this relationship. Coping self-efficacy has been found to be related to dispositional mindfulness, academic and personal-emotional adjustment to university. Therefore, this cross-sectional study sought to investigate a possible indirect effect of dispositional mindfulness on academic and personal-emotional adjustment through coping self-efficacy (emotion-focused and problem-focused). A sample of 65 second-year undergraduate students ( M age = 19.57, SD = .78; 77% women; 68% White) completed a series of measures. Problem-focused self-efficacy was found to be consistent with a partial mediation model whereby increase in dispositional mindfulness was associated with increase in academic and personal-emotional adjustment, partially through increases in problem-focused self-efficacy. Emotion-focused coping self-efficacy was consistent with a partial mediation model whereby increase in dispositional mindfulness was associated with increase in personal-emotional adjustment partially through emotion-focused coping self-efficacy, but was not consistent with a mediation model between dispositional mindfulness and academic adjustment. Findings have theoretical and clinical implications for student adjustment to university and retention.
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) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".