An Analysis Of The Tolerance For Ambiguity Among Accounting Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tolerance for ambiguity is a personality characteristic that reflects the general feelings and attitudes of an individual toward ambiguity and ambiguous situations. Prior research has found accounting students to be significantly less tolerant of ambiguity than the general population, with female accounting students less tolerant than their male counterparts. The research on which this article is reporting aimed to examine the personality characteristic tolerance for ambiguity among accounting students to determine whether those currently being attracted to the profession are still less tolerant of ambiguity than the norm as reported by prior research, taking into account the drive from the accounting profession to attract individuals to the profession who are effective communicators, who can think and act strategically, are able to solve unstructured problems, and are aware of business issues. Tolerance for ambiguity was measured using the AT-20 scale, a widely used and validated instrument developed by MacDonald (1970). The results of this study confirm that students enrolled for accounting degree programmes are less tolerant for ambiguity (mean = 7.50) than students enrolled for other business programmes (mean = 8.16). Female students enrolled in accounting degree programmes were significantly less tolerant for ambiguity than their male counterparts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".