MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188192037 · doi:10.3917/geco1.145.0046

Le coaching : exploration d’une pratique

2021· article· fr· W3188192037 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

VenueAnnales des Mines - Gérer et comprendre · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicCoaching Methods and Impact
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le marché du coaching est en pleine croissance. À partir d’une série d’entretiens avec des coachs, indépendants, liés à un cabinet ou internes à l’entreprise, complétés par une observation non participante à deux séances de mentoring collectif, nous nous interrogeons dans cet article sur le paradoxe d’une pratique sans fondement théorique (ou pouvant faire référence à une multitude d’approches – psychologie, neurosciences, etc.), mais très cadrée (une dizaine de séances, dont deux tripartites – coach, coaché, représentant de l’entreprise). L’hypothèse formulée est que l’explication de ce paradoxe est à chercher dans la nature marchande de la relation de coaching, qui explique son cadrage strict compatible avec des approches multiples laissées au libre choix du coach.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.291 · 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