MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976251283 · doi:10.1177/0894845309340798

Effectiveness of Career Counseling and the Impact of the Working Alliance

2009· article· en· W1976251283 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Career Development · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllianceCareer counselingPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionLife satisfactionApplied psychologyCounseling psychologyCareer developmentClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzes the role of the working alliance on the life satisfaction and career decision difficulties of clients participating in career counseling in Switzerland. The study also compares these career counseling clients to a group of students who did not seek counseling, to explore the overall effectiveness of a face-to-face career counseling intervention, using a pre—post design. Results indicated that the working alliance was positively associated with clients’ satisfaction with the intervention and with the final level of their life satisfaction. Working alliance was also negatively associated with the final levels of career decision difficulties. Moreover, clients’ career decision difficulties significantly decreased and their life satisfaction increased throughout the intervention. These findings suggest that working alliance represents an important variable to better understand career interventions’ underlying mechanisms. Moreover, face-to-face career counseling is effective considering career-specific as well as broader, life-related indicators.

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.249 · 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