MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061128410 · doi:10.1002/hrm.21497

Transfer of training: Written self‐guidance to increase self‐efficacy and interviewing performance of job seekers

2012· article· en· W2061128410 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

VenueHuman Resource Management · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman Resource Development and Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyInterviewSelf-efficacyPersuasionSelection (genetic algorithm)Applied psychologySeekersMotivational interviewingImpression managementJob interviewMedical educationSocial psychologyClinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)MedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Subsequent to training IT professionals ( n = 35) in skills for performing effectively in a selection interview, 16 were randomly assigned to a transfer of training intervention, written self‐guidance (WSG). This methodology is based on social cognitive and self‐persuasion theories. The results showed that WSG resulted in significantly higher ratings from an interviewer than did those in the control group. Self‐efficacy for interviewing skill mediated the relationship between WSG and performance. A content analysis of the WSG letters showed that the use of self‐affirming and self‐relevant statements was positively related to performance in the selection interview. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.259 · 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