MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144415934

The Relationship Between Engineering and Young Women's Occupational Priorities

2001· article· en· W2144415934 on OpenAlexaffvenue
F. Heather Davey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While women's participation rates in formerly male-dominated professions have increased markedly over the past three decades, engineering is a notable exception to the trend. This study investigated whether gender differences in occupational priorities might contribute to the paucity of women in engineering. Grade 12 students who had made occupational plans were asked the reasons for their choices. Results revealed that interests were the highest priority for male students, whereas altruistic values were more important to female students. Contrary to expectation, working conditions were not a factor. Implications for career counselling are discussed.

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 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 score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Counselling and PsychotherapySame topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207