MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901256995 · doi:10.1080/03069885.2018.1544827

The effect of a career development programme based on the Hope-Action Theory: Hope to Work for refugees in British Columbia

2018· article· en· W2901256995 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hyung Joon Yoon, Natasha Bailey, Norman E. Amundson, Spencer G. Niles

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Guidance and Counselling · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOptimism, Hope, and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDivision of Human Resource DevelopmentUniversity of British ColumbiaAl Akhawayn University in IfraneUniversity of VirginiaGeorge Washington University
KeywordsCLARITYMediationJob satisfactionPsychologyCareer developmentRefugeeWork (physics)Social psychologyApplied psychologySociologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to assess the proximal and distal outcomes of a career development training programme for refugees that was developed based on the Hope-Action Theory (HAT). Adopting an experimental design, proximal outcomes such as self-efficacy, hope-action competencies, job search clarity, and career adaptability were assessed three times; and distal outcomes including employment status, job-seeking activities, career growth, hopeful career state, work engagement, and job satisfaction were assessed once at nine months. We used a two-way mixed effects analysis of covariance and a serial mediation analysis. The programme was effective in developing hope-action competencies, general self-efficacy, and job search clarity. The experimental group participants exhibited higher hopeful career state and work engagement. A serial mediation model of the HAT-based intervention predicting job satisfaction was found. Limitations and future directions 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 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)0.004
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Guidance and CounsellingSame topicOptimism, Hope, and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207