Transformational mentoring: Leadership behaviors of spinal cord injury peer mentors.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the leadership behaviors of spinal cord injury (SCI) peer mentors and examine whether behaviors of peer mentors align with the tenets of transformational leadership theory. METHOD: A total of 12 SCI peer mentors aged 28-75 (M = 49.4) who had between 3 and 56 years (M = 13.9) of mentoring experience were recruited for the study. Utilizing a qualitative methodology (informed by a social constructionist approach), each mentor engaged in a semistructured interview about their experiences as a peer mentor. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and subjected to a directed content analysis. RESULTS: SCI peer mentors reported using mentorship behaviors and engaging with mentees in a manner that closely aligns with the core components of transformational leadership theory: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation. A new subcomponent of inspirational motivation described as 'active promotion of achievement' was also identified and may be unique to the context of peer mentorship. CONCLUSIONS: SCI peer mentors inherently use behaviors associated with transformational leadership theory when interacting with mentees. The results from this study have the potential to inform SCI peer mentor training programs about specific leadership behaviors that mentors could be taught to use and could lead to more effective mentoring practices for people with SCI. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it