MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W38610319 · doi:10.3390/s24072107

The Salvation Army corps officer: A territorial survey of vocational preparation, role, efficacy, and ministry satisfaction

2013· article· en· W38610319 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mark Wesley Tillsley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman Resource Development and Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOfficerVocational educationChristian ministryManagementPolitical sciencePublic relationsPsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Officers of the Salvation Army (SA or Army) are Protestant clergy, ordained ministers of the Salvation Army denomination who function in a broad range of leadership roles. Operations of the SA are supervised by trained, commissioned officers. Officers proclaim the gospel and serve as pastors, administrators, teachers, social workers, counselors, youth leaders, and musicians. SA corps officership is a ministry call to care for the lost, marginalized, exploited, and neglected in society. Congregants and the larger community might have divergent expectations and define ministry effectiveness differently. Like other evangelical clergy, the SA officer is called to be biblically faithful and culturally relevant. This study focused specific attention on SA corps officers in the USA Eastern Territory. This quantitative study examined corps officers' perceptions of training and preparation, support by supervising officers, ministry roles, and leadership styles relative to corps officer satisfaction, efficacy, aspirations, and longevity. More than half (420) of the 728 SA corps officers in the USA Eastern Territory completed the SAVED survey instrument. Results indicate corps officers' perceptions of administrative support, administrative competency, and adequate training, and preparation all correlate significantly with satisfaction and efficacy. Based on these findings, the greatest predictor of corps officers' satisfaction and sense of efficacy is the corps officers' perception of administrative support from the divisional leadership.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Resource Development and Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207