MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006817011 · doi:10.1037/h0088084

Review of The scales of success: Constructions of life-career success of eminent men and women lawyers.

2002· article· en· W2006817011 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Systems and Logistics Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SHEELAGH O'DONOVAN-POLTEN The Scales of Success: Constructions of Life-Career Success of Eminent Men and Women Lawyers Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 2001, 351 pages (ISBN 0-8020-8392-7, C$24.95, Softcover) Reviewed by ANNE MARSHALL Many writers have posed the question, What constitutes a successful life? Sheelagh O'Donovan-Polten has asked a group of professionals who are themselves seen as successful, describe what it means them. Her central research question How does a professionally successful, middle-aged Canadian lawyer construct success? An additional important question To what degree do such constructions differ by gender? The author uses the term life-career indicate that the scope of her inquiry is broader than simply career. The organization of the book is similar a research report. The seven chapters are divided into four parts. Part One provides a rationale for the research, background literature in adult development, career development, gender issues, and related areas, as well as a description of the inquiry process. Case profiles of the eight participants are presented in Part Two. Part Three includes a description of the 14 data themes, divided into common themes and gender-linked themes. Concluding propositions and implications of the research constitute Part Four. The interview protocols and other research documents are included at the end of the book. Robert Kegan's (1982, 1994) constructive-development model used as a theoretical frame of reference for the inquiry process. Kegan has described a comprehensive theory of the psychological evolution of meaning-making. He depicts adult development as a hierarchically organized series of alternating periods of stability and transition. Five balances (1982) or orders of consciousness (1994) represent interludes of dynamic development stability, during which assimilation of and accommodation new experiences proceed in context of a relationship established between the individual and the environment. Yet, each evolutionary balance achieved is only a temporary solution the lifelong dialectical struggle between two human yearnings - the desire for social connection and the desire for independence. O'Donovan-Polten adopted a phenomenological approach, employing minimally structured, in-depth interviews with her eight collaborative co-participants. She interviewed four male and four female middle-aged lawyers who were in private practice in the Toronto area. All were considered be highly successful according peer judgement and other external criteria. Each a senior-level partner in their respective law firms, and between 40 and 60 years old. In the first phase of the research, O'Donovan-Polten conducted what she termed a Kegan-style interview, the first part of which was virtually identical that prescribed for the Subject-- Object Interview (p. 22). Six 24 months later, she followed up with the second phase, Profile Review Interview, in which the co-participant's preliminary profile checked for accuracy, completeness, and confidentiality. In the third phase, she conducted a comparative and inductive analysis of the categorized and synthesized data. The eight case profiles presented have been personally endorsed by the lawyers, and are interesting read. Each has slightly different data category labels, reflecting the characteristic voice, including specific vocabulary, of each participant. The four male profiles are presented first, then the four female ones, in order to render male versus female comparisons all the more explicit and stark (p. 30). Verbatim quotes from the interviews are included in the profiles. Fourteen themes emerged from the analysis. These themes are presented in a fairly complicated graphic, representing a set of scales. O'DonovanPolten sought an image that could symbolize both the data analysis as well as a vision of human development that gender- and culture-sensitive. …

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.174 · 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