MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W98311160

The effects of metamotivational dominance and perceived control on mood, telic and paratelic state, coping styles, and persistence after experiencing academic failure.

2002· article· en· W98311160 on OpenAlexaffabout
Parveen Kaur. Grewal

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Safety, and Science Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersistence (discontinuity)PsychologyMoodCoping (psychology)Dominance (genetics)Social psychologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyEngineeringBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reversal theory posits that individuals reverse between being in a telic state (serious-minded) and a paratelic state (playful). Individuals can also be dominant in one of the two states, and thus telic and paratelic dominance was investigated in the present study. One hundred and forty-two undergraduate students volunteered to participate in the study. All participants were exposed to failure feedback on an initial test, and then half were informed it was possible to change their score on the subsequent test while the other half were told that due to high correlations between the two tests, it was typically impossible to improve their scores on the second test. Although strong effects of perceived control were not observed and the hypotheses were not confirmed, additional analyses revealed that telic and paratelic dominance influenced mood, telic and paratelic state and coping styles. Overall, telic dominant individuals expressed more negative mood, were more likely to be in a telic state, and engaged in more emotion-oriented and avoidance-oriented coping, while paratelic dominant individuals expressed more positive mood, were more likely to be in a paratelic state, and engaged in more problem-focused coping. Although most of the results are supported by reversal theory, the findings for coping styles appear to contradict the literature. A plausible explanation is provided for the inconsistent results observed with coping styles.Dept. of Psychology. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2002 .G74. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 41-04, page: 1216. Adviser: Kathryn Lafreniere. Thesis (M.A.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2002.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor)Same topicEducation, Safety, and Science StudiesFrench-language works237,207