MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1580626919

Work relationships with developmentally disabled adults

2000· article· en· W1580626919 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Grant M. Wienker

Bibliographic record

VenueSIT Digital Collections (SIT Graduate Institute) · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyWork (physics)Developmental psychologyEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct support workers are a key link in the effort to integrate adults with developmental disabilities into society. Due to low pay, the difficult nature of the work, inconsistent training and the undervalued state of the profession, staff turnover is high and client skill development suffers as a result. Inspired by the author's practicum experience, the following research question was developed: What experiential process of adaption, rejection or acceptance do direct support staff working with developmentally disabled adults in Japan and the United States go through? For the purpose of this study, field interviews were conducted with direct support workers at facilities for adults with developmental dis abilities in Shimane, Japan and Vancouver, Washington. The study results suggest that due to the challenging nature of the work, direct support workers experience repeated stages requiring ongoing adaption to difficult situations and behaviors. These workers will need to overcome and accept challenges if they are to remain in the field. Particularly in the United States, a majority of such workers soon reject the work and leave.

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)0.004
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIT Digital Collections (SIT Graduate Institute)Same topicDisability Education and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207