MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126482243 · doi:10.1177/1069072704270297

Motivations Underlying Career Decision-Making Activities: The Career Decision-Making Autonomy Scale (CDMAS)

2004· article· en· W2126482243 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 · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAutonomyScale (ratio)Self-determination theoryPersonalitySocial psychologyConstruct (python library)Construct validityPredictive validityVocational educationApplied psychologyPsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the present research was to develop and validate a measure of motivation toward career decision-making activities, the Career Decision-Making Autonomy Scale (CDMAS). The CDMAS is designed to assess the constructs of intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, introjected regulation, and external regulation. A longitudinal study was used to develop and validate the CDMAS. Overall, results show that the CDMAS is composed of four internally consistent factors. The construct validity of the scale is also supported by (a) a quasi-simplex pattern of correlations, (b) correlations with personality variables and vocational constructs, and (c) convergent and divergent correlations. In sum, the CDMAS represents a valid self-report measure of intrinsic motivation, identified regulation, introjected regulation, and external regulation toward career decision-making activities.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.301 · 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