MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Empowering high‐risk clients to attain a better quality of life: a career resiliency framework

2004· article· en· W2130922791 on OpenAlex
Rory R. Rickwood, Julian Roberts, Suzanne Batten, Anne Marshall, Kendra Massie

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 Employment Counseling · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsNuu Chah Nulth Tribal Council
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCareer developmentPsychologyCareer counselingPerspective (graphical)Cognitive Information ProcessingContext (archaeology)Applied psychologyCareer portfolioPersonal developmentSocial psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Career counselors frequently encounter clients who are at high risk for career and life development difficulties. Research suggests there is a connection between resiliency and successful career development in high‐risk clients. Many high‐risk individuals have poor decision‐making skills and lack motivation to succeed in life and career development. This article describes a career resiliency framework in which career resiliency is best understood within the context of psychological resiliency. Specifically, this article explicates how career counseling from a resiliency theory perspective may promote successful career development for populations dealing with multiple barriers.

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)0.000
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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.377 · 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