MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1954371308 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n22p43

Analysis of Links between Opinions on Coaching and Social Intelligence of Management Students

2015· article· en· W1954371308 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCoaching Methods and Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingEmpathyPsychologySocial competenceSocial intelligenceCognitionApplied psychologyCompetence (human resources)Context (archaeology)Emotional intelligenceDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologySocial change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The report presents findings gained by applying a questionnaire for detection of social intelligence - MESI - in the context of evaluating coaching as an education method on management students. Analysis of the acquired data confirmed the essential psychometric parameters of the MESI methodology (which detects factors of manipulation, empathy and social irritability), as well as the questionnaire for assessment of coaching (which detects factors of cognition, competence and social context). The research was conducted on the sample of 267 participants (121 male and 146 female). The correlation analysis of links between the factors of social intelligence and those of coaching assessment confirmed existence of the selected significant interrelations between the social intelligence factor of empathy, cognition indicators and the social context.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.361 · 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