MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999912383 · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsz247

Supporting early career researchers: insights from interdisciplinary marine scientists

2019· article· en· W2999912383 on OpenAlex
Evan J. Andrews, Sarah Harper, Tim Cashion, Juliano Palacios‐Abrantes, Jessica Blythe, Jack Daly, Sondra Eger, Carie Hoover, Nicolás Talloni-Álvarez, Louise Teh, Nathan Bennett, Graham Epstein, Christine Knott, Sarah L Newell, Charlotte K. Whitney

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

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of OttawaDalhousie UniversityBrock UniversityMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipMainstreamSustainabilityCareer PathwaysCoping (psychology)Medical educationCareer developmentDelphi methodMarine researchEngineering ethicsPsychologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsEngineeringMedicineComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The immense challenges associated with realizing ocean and coastal sustainability require highly skilled interdisciplinary marine scientists. However, the barriers experienced by early career researchers (ECRs) seeking to address these challenges, and the support required to overcome those barriers, are not well understood. This study examines the perspectives of ECRs on opportunities to build interdisciplinary research capacity in marine science. We engaged 23 current and former graduate students and postdoctoral fellows in a policy Delphi method with three rounds of surveying that included semi-structured questionnaires and q-methodology. We identified the following five barriers that limit ECRs’ capacity for interdisciplinary research: (i) demanding workloads; (ii) stress linked to funding, publishing, and employment uncertainty; (iii) limited support for balancing personal and professional commitments; (iv) ineffective supervisory support; and (v) the steep learning curve associated with interdisciplinary research. Our analysis highlights three main types of responses to these barriers adopted by ECRs, including “taking on too much”, “coping effectively”, and “maintaining material wellbeing at any cost”. To overcome these barriers, we propose the following three institutional actions to build early career interdisciplinary researcher capacity: formalize mentorship, create interdisciplinary research groups, and mainstream mental health support.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.364 · 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