The Influence of Family of Origin on the Career Development of Outstanding Women with Disabilities in China
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The influence of family of origin on the career development of women has attracted the attention of both researchers and practitioners in the counseling and rehabilitation fields in the past decades (Hartung, 2002; Huang & Sverke, 2007; Larson & Wilson, 1998; Noonan, Gallor, Hensler-McGinnis, Fassinger, Wang, & Goodman, 2004; Szymanski & Parker, 1996; Whiston & Keller, 2004). From a developmental contextual perspective, researchers indicate that career development is an interactive process where the individual both influences and is influenced by the social, cultural, and physical features of his or her environment (Brown, 2002; Osipow & Fitzgerald, 1996; Whiston & Keller, 2004). Family is an essential part of an individual's environment. For many individuals, relationships with family members are some of the most potent and significant relational experiences in their lives (Whiston & Keller, 2004). A body of published research indicates that family contextual factors such as parents' occupations and parents' encouragement and support are influential factors on the career development of women without disabilities in the U.S. (Blustein, 1997; Brown, 2004; Hartung, 2010; Larson & Wilson, 1998; Pearson & Bieschke, 2001; Whiston & Keller, 2004). However, there has been very little research focused specifically on the career development of women with disabilities (WWDs), particularly, in the area of family influences on the career development of WWDs in developing countries. The literature indicates that women with disabilities face greater discrimination in society (Banks & Kaschak, 2003; Groce, 1997; Habib, 1995; Heumann, 2003; Russo & Wehmeyer, 2001; United Nations, 2013). In the U.S., WWDs often encounter challenges to maintain overall health due to society's physical and attitudinal barriers (Chevarley, Thierry, Gill, Ryerson, & Nosek, 2006; Hughes, 2006; Nosek, 2010; Nosek, Howland, Rintala, & Young, 2001; Parish & Huh, 2006; Parish & Ellison-Martin, 2007; Smith, 2008; Smith & Ruiz, 2009). Several national and statewide surveys indicated that WWDs experienced limited access to healthcare compared to women without disabilities (Chevarley et al, 2006; US Department of Health & Human Services, 2000). This lack of access to primary care led to recurrent, but often prevent able, health problems which, in turn, affected education, career development, employment, and quality of life for WWDs (Hampton, Ordway, & Zhu, 2010; Iezzoni, Davis, Soukup, & O'Day, 2002;Nosek, 2010; Shigaki, Hagglund, Clark, & Confoti, 2002; Thierry & Cyril, 2004; US Department of Health & Human Services, 2000). Furthermore, a number of barriers to the career development of WWDs have been implicated by researchers. These barriers include anti-disability prejudice from others (Hanna & Rogovsky, 1991; Lindstrom, Johnson, Doren, Zane, Post, & Harley, 2008), family issues (Hanna & Rogovsky, 1991; Lindstrom et al., 2008), gender (Fine & Asch, 1988; Lindstrom et ah, 2008), lack of education (Szymanski & Parker, 2006), environmental barriers (Conyers, Koch, & Szymanski, 1998; Nosek et ah, 2001; Szymanski & Parker, 2006), lack of social support (Danek, 1992), and stress (Crewe & Clarke, 1996). Similar problems are faced by WWDs in China. Currently, China is experiencing a transition marked by rapid economic growth and profound social changes (e.g., the gap between the rich and poor, particularly those with disabilities). These changes have encouraged policy makers to reconsider disability-related issues from a social stability perspective. Equal education and employment for WWDs are topics in the 2010-2020 National Education Strategic Plan (the Ministry of Education, 2010) and in the mass media. However, career development opportunities for Chinese people with disabilities including women are still bleak. Many individuals with disabilities are limited by society's low expectations of them and the general belief that people with disabilities do not have the capability or skills to work towards a challenging career in a field of their choice. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».