MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114100938 · doi:10.5539/jel.v10n2p1

Are Chapter 31 Military Veterans Returning to College More Likely to Choose Intrinsically-oriented Versus Extrinsically-oriented Majors?

2020· article· en· W3114100938 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Glen Miller, Gary Blau, Deborah Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Academic Research Areas
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrinsic motivationPsychologyMilitary serviceTask (project management)Military personnelCompensation (psychology)Service memberMedical educationTask forceSocial psychologyApplied psychologyPolitical scienceMedicineManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Helping military veterans successfully transition to civilian life is an important issue. Education can help with this transition. No prior studies were found on the general type of undergraduate major United States (US) Chapter 31 veterans enroll in. Chapter 31 provides tuition benefits to help entitled transitioning military veterans, with service-connected disabilities, go to college to obtain a degree. Self-determination theory (SDT) suggests two general categories of majors, intrinsic (I) versus extrinsic (E). Intrinsic motivation emphasizes doing a task for its inherent satisfaction, while extrinsic motivation targets doing the same task to achieve external rewards, such as compensation. Archival data was analyzed using small samples of undergraduate Chapter 31 military veterans in 2016, 2018 and 2020. Overall, the results supported the research question, i.e., Chapter 31 veterans will be more likely to choose intrinsically motivating versus extrinsically motivating college majors. Results, including limitations and suggestions for future research 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicDiverse Academic Research AreasFrench-language works237,207