MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107099030 · doi:10.1177/1069072705277917

Nonstandard Career Trajectories and Their Various Forms

2005· article· en· W2107099030 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 Assessment · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychologyGrounded theorySample (material)Qualitative researchApplied psychologyMedical educationSociologySocial scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sample of 124 participants (62 men, 62 women) was used in this qualitative research study of people having experienced nonstandard work for the last 3 years. Those participants were met for individual semistructured interviews of approximately 2 hours in length. On the basis of a content analysis with the use of the NUD*IST analysis software, 4 trajectories and 14 subtrajectories were identified: ascending (constant progression, final recovery, uncertain outcome), descending (sudden drop, caught in a trap, long descent, noninsertion), interesting maintenance (accepted job insecurity, project continuity, new project), and uninteresting maintenance (bogged down, leitmotif, adapted, and 180 degrees). The descending and uninteresting maintenance trajectories were predominant, comprising more than two thirds of the participants. Differences were found between genders, age groups, and educational levels. The results are discussed with respect to the scientific literature and to the differences that were observed.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.346 · 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