A Scoping Review of Life Design Intervention Research: Implications for Counselling and Psychotherapy Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recently developed paradigm in career counselling known as life design has caused a proliferation of new interventions. A scoping study was performed to provide an overview of empirical support for the effectiveness of these interventions. Twelve articles that evaluate the efficacy of eight interventions were found. Interventions included individual and group forms of the Career Construction Interview and My Career Story. Others were group-based life design interventions, the Career Construction Genogram, an online-based life design intervention, and a classroom intervention designed for elementary children. Career adaptability was the most commonly evaluated outcome and participants were most commonly from Italy, with no study using North American participants. Experimental or quasi-experimental research designs were most frequently used, while several articles reported on case studies. The authors recommend that future research balance case studies and experimental designs and that further research should validate findings with Canadian populations. This article notes the synergistic potential of engaging with social constructionist approaches in the broader field of counselling and psychotherapy for developing new interventions.
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 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 | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".