MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886605099 · doi:10.1002/hrm.21932

Skill development in reverse mentoring: Motivational processes of mentors and learners

2018· article· en· W2886605099 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Resource Management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMediationContext (archaeology)Moderated mediationAffect (linguistics)Sample (material)Test (biology)Medical educationSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building on Murphy's (2012) model of reverse mentoring, we examine the psychological processes that contribute to skill development in initiatives where knowledge is transferred from younger to older individuals. We employ a sample of younger mentors ( n = 457) and older learners ( n = 293) participating in a digital skills initiative to test parallel moderated mediation models. Our findings show extrinsic motivation plays a dominant role in the development of younger groups' mentoring skills, while older learners' digital skills development is primarily driven by intrinsic motivation. We also find positive affect and self‐efficacy can serve as personal resources in this context, but only for mentors. Taken together, our results suggest motivational processes in reverse mentoring unfold differently for the two groups involved in the exchange. Recommendations for human resource practice, including specific guidelines for developing intergenerational learning initiatives, 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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.736

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.277 · 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