MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W241504485

Personality and Psychological Well-Being of Canadian Forces Officer Candidates: The Role of Coping

2011· article· en· W241504485 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alla Skomorovsky, Sanela Dursun

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPersonalityCoping (psychology)Clinical psychologyPath analysis (statistics)OfficerPerceptionSocial psychologyApplied psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract : There is evidence to suggest that both personality and coping strategies that individuals adopt to deal with stressors play an important role in the psychological well-being of military personnel. The overall goal of the study was to understand the multifaceted relationships between personality, coping with stress, and psychological well-being in the military context. Specifically, the study examined various mechanisms by which coping strategies might have influenced the link between personality and psychological well-being or perception of basic training stress of CF Officer Candidates undertaking their basic Officer training (N=200). Multiple regression analyses demonstrated that both personality and coping explained significant and unique proportions of variance in psychological well-being (life satisfaction and psychological health symptoms) and perceptions of training (training satisfaction and training stress). Coping was found to play an important role in psychological well-being and training perceptions of CF candidates, over and above that of personality. Furthermore, hierarchical regression analyses and bootstrapping techniques demonstrated that coping played both a moderating and a partial mediating role in the path between personality and psychological well-being, providing evidence for the differential choice-effectiveness model. The results suggest that providing coping training to CF candidates could be beneficial. Training, focusing on the effectiveness of particular coping strategies (e.g., problem-solving and social support seeking), could be offered to individuals starting their basic training. In addition, training that focuses on stress management and coping, including approaches of setting priorities to balance work and family within the context of the military environment could be beneficial. Further implications of the findings and future research suggestions 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.608
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout→French-language works237,207→