Counseling psychology trainees' perceptions of training and commitments to social justice.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This mixed methods study examined social justice commitments of counseling psychology graduate trainees. In the quantitative portion of the study, a national sample of trainees (n = 260) completed a web-based survey assessing their commitments to social justice and related personal and training variables. Results suggested that students desired greater social justice training than what they experienced in their programs. In the qualitative portion, we used a phenomenological approach to expand and elaborate upon quantitative results. A subsample (n = 7) of trainees who identified as strong social justice activists were interviewed regarding their personal, professional, and training experiences. Eleven themes related to participants' meanings of and experiences with social justice emerged within 4 broad categories: nature of social justice, motivation for activism, role of training, and personal and professional integration. Thematic findings as well as descriptive statistics informed the selection and ordering of variables in a hierarchical regression analysis that examined predictors of social justice commitment. Results indicated that trainees' perceptions of training environment significantly predicted their social justice commitment over and above their general activist orientation and spirituality. Findings are discussed collectively, and implications for training and future research are provided.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it