Bibliographic record
Abstract
As women on parole and probation transition from correctional facilities to the community, they face many threats to reintegration. Reintegration counsellors offer support to individuals on parole and probation who are re-entering the community. Working closely with a marginalized population places counsellors at risk for burnout and hopelessness. Research indicates that hope can serve as a sustaining and motivating factor when facing difficult working contexts. Further, a large body of research consistently confirms the importance of hope in the human change process, both for clients and clinicians. The current study investigated how reintegration counsellors fostered and maintained hope in their work, including their personal descriptions of hope. Employing Merriam’s (2002) basic interpretive inquiry, five reintegration counsellors participated in semi-structured interviews about their work experiences. Thematic analysis indicated that hope played an important role in these counsellors’ experiences of work and their belief in their clients. The overarching theme of the findings, Maintaining a Hope-Seeking Orientation, elucidates the complexity of maintaining a hope-seeking orientation in the challenging context of reintegration counselling. Specifically, participants in this study were understood to hold a hope-seeking orientation to their worklife that included, viewing life as a journey, maintaining a hopeful perspective, holding ‘down-to-earth’ expectations, and viewing hope-seeking as a learnable skill. Participants associated hope with both motivation and meaning, believing that hope was a necessary ingredient in their work and a resource to combat work-related exhaustion. Implications for counselling include sustaining hope at work through a variety of means, including perspective change.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.010 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".