MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1843870271 · doi:10.19030/jdm.v1i1.5024

An Exploration Of Gender And Trust In Mentoring Relationships

2006· article· en· W1843870271 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Elliott, Joanne Leck, Barbara Orser, Catherine Mossop

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Diversity Management (JDM) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedical educationDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyApplied psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To explore the role of gender and trust in mentoring, fifteen interviews with mentors were conducted. Eight mentors were male and seven were female; eight were involved in cross-gender mentoring. Subjects were asked to discuss the levels of trust they had developed in their relationships, and what had influenced its development. Interviews were conducted by telephone, transcribed, and analyzed independently by the two authors. This paper will present these findings and discuss future avenues of research. Practical implications to mentoring program designers are also discussed.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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 score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations22
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Diversity Management (JDM)Same topicMentoring and Academic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207