MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069941037 · doi:10.1177/0894845313486354

The Experience of Emotions During the Job Search and Choice Process Among Novice Job Seekers

2013· article· en· W2069941037 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 · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeekersPsychologyJob attitudeJob analysisSocial psychologyJob performanceProcess (computing)Job designJob satisfactionApplied psychologyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors investigate the role of emotions in the job search and choice process of novice job seekers. Results of qualitative analyses of the first-person accounts of 41 job seekers indicate that participants whose recollections of their job search contained emotional language were more likely to display a haphazard job search strategy than those whose recollections did not. They were also more likely to engage in choice strategies that were not driven by concrete criteria. In comparison, participants whose recollections were not emotion-laden reported more criteria-driven choice strategies, and did not display the tendency to revise or lower their standards or to settle for a less desirable job than they had been seeking. Implications of these findings are discussed in terms of the role of emotions in job search and choice research as well as in terms of job search counseling for novice job seekers.

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)0.000
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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.291 · 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