MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1530118086 · doi:10.1108/09649420710761464

Career priority patterns among managerial and professional women in Turkey

2007· article· en· W1530118086 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen in Management Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicWorkaholism, burnout, and well-being
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurkishCareer developmentPsychologyOriginalityValue (mathematics)Work (physics)Social psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This research aims to examine potential antecedents and consequences of different career priority patterns among managerial and professional women working in a large Turkish bank. Two career priority patterns advanced by Schwartz were considered: career‐primary and career‐family. Previous research conducted in other countries has compared these career priority patterns. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected from 286 managerial and professional women using anonymously completed questionnaires, a 72 percent response rate. Findings Career‐primary and career‐family women were similar on personal demographic and work situation characteristics. However, the two groups were significantly different on a variety of other measures. Career‐primary women were more satisfied with their jobs and careers, had more optimistic career prospects, were more work engaged, exhibited higher levels of workaholism and reported higher levels of psychological well‐being. These findings were somewhat different from those obtained in previous research suggesting possible country and culture differences. Research limitations/implications All data were collected using questionnaires at one point in time making it difficult to draw conclusions on causality. It is also not clear the extent to which these findings would generalize to women in other occupations. Practical implications The findings raise potential career development issues and their role in the satisfaction and well‐being of managerial women, these having possible career counseling implications. Originality/value This study replicates previous work and extends this to another county. Future research should be devoted to greater understanding of country and culture effects on the findings.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.290 · 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