MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232243147 · doi:10.22215/etd/2015-10939

Modeling Intention to Pursue a High Tech Career Using Social Cognitive Career Theory

2015· dissertation· en· W4232243147 on OpenAlexaff
Samina M. Saifuddin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial cognitive theoryConfirmatory factor analysisStructural equation modelingPsychologyExploratory factor analysisSocial psychologyContext (archaeology)Theory of planned behaviorTest (biology)Applied psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychometricsManagementMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is the first to apply Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT: Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994, 2000) to predict engineering students' intention to pursue a high-tech career in a South Asian context.The purpose of this study was twofold.The first objective was to test SCCT's interest and choice model in a non-Western context in order to test the applicability of the theory.The second objective was to expand beyond the core of the theory to incorporate background and proximal, contextual gender related variables such as gender-role orientation, masculine image of high-tech professionals, and gendered perceptions.The data came from undergraduate engineering students studying in different universities in Bangladesh.Data were collected through self-administered pencil and paper survey.A total of 976 valid surveys were used in the data analysis.As this study was based on a new context -Bangladesh, the construct validity of the measurement scales was assessed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).EFA and CFA should not be performed on the same data set; the data were randomly split into two groups for this analysis.Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to assess model fit for the whole sample.Results indicated that social cognitive theory was a good fit for the data.The multivariate analysis indicated that all of the core SCCT predictors -occupational self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and interest -were important in explaining intentions.Gender-role orientation also played a significant role although gender related variables did not perform as expected.Also, contrasting findings regarding environmental variables of social support and barriers

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.239 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207