MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551402974

Multicultural Counselling Competencies with Female Adolescents: A Qualitative Investigation of Client Experiences

2016· article· en· W2551402974 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Anusha Kassan, Ada L. Sinacore

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismCompetence (human resources)Cultural competencePsychologyInterpretative phenomenological analysisPsychological interventionPerceptionCultural sensitivityQualitative researchPhenomenology (philosophy)PedagogyMedical educationMedicinePsychotherapistSocial psychologySociologyPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the cultural landscape of North America continues to shift, the helping profession is tasked with the responsibility of delivering culturally sensitive services. This phenomenological study explored the experiences of young women who attended counselling during their adolescence. Using a multicultural counselling competency framework as well as an inclusive definition of multiculturalism, the central phenomenon under investigation was that of participants’ perceptions of their counsellors’ cultural competence. Results demonstrated that counsellor awareness, knowledge, skills, and the multicultural counselling relationship are important competencies when working with female adolescents. Additional meaningful themes included cultural sensitivity, family interventions, and help beyond counselling. Implications for training and practice 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Counselling and PsychotherapySame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207