MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1765589811 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v36i2.183538

Les facteurs de satisfaction et d’insatisfaction aux cycles supérieurs dans les universités québécoises francophones

2006· article· en· W1765589811 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Brigitte Gemme, Yves Gingras

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDoctoral Education Challenges and Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttritionSocializationPsychologyJob satisfactionGraduate studentsMedical educationHumanitiesPedagogySocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elucidating the factors that determine the level of satisfaction of graduate students may help us explain the high attrition rates observed in master’s and doctoral programs. Based on a survey of nearly one thousand students and graduates of master’s degree and PhD programs in Québec’s francophone universities, this paper examines the variables affecting their overall satisfaction from their studies. The fi ndings suggest that the factors most closely related to research training are strongly associated with satisfaction. These factors include supervision and the capacity to produce and publish research results. Moreover, the type of funding secured by students is signifi cantly associated with global satisfaction, while gender and age are not. The study concludes that supervised socialization into the role of professional researcher contributes to students’ success in graduate programs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationSame topicDoctoral Education Challenges and SolutionsFrench-language works237,207