La compétence interculturelle est-elle acquise grâce à l’expérience internationale ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les compétences interculturelles sont difficiles à évaluer, et les facteurs permettant de les développer, mal connus. Cette étude opérationnalise une conceptualisation multidimensionnelle de la compétence interculturelle, incluant traits de personnalité et connaissances. Une enquête auprès de 443 personnes de 27 pays, et à l’expérience internationale très variable, montre que les personnes ayant le plus d’expériences internationales sont aussi celles dont les compétences interculturelles sont les plus élevées. Mais l’impact de l’expérience internationale sur la compétence interculturelle atteint seulement 5 %. L’expérience internationale ne peut donc pas être utilisée comme « proxy » pour la compétence interculturelle. Les résultats révèlent également l’existence d’effets de seuil liés aux voyages à l’étranger.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".