MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309923991 · doi:10.1177/10690727221141983

Trajectories of Change in Career Decision Difficulties During a Manualized Individual Career Counseling Intervention: The Influence of Counselor Adherence, Working Alliance and Client Personality Traits

2022· article· en· W4309923991 on OpenAlexafffund
Francis Milot‐Lapointe, Yann Le Corff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Career Assessment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et Culture
KeywordsPsychologyIntervention (counseling)AllianceCareer counselingNeuroticismBig Five personality traitsPersonalityClinical psychologyApplied psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to identify trajectories of change in client career decision difficulties during a manualized career counseling intervention and examine the role of counselor adherence, working alliance, and personality traits in predicting these trajectories. Participants were 257 individuals who received an average of 7.79 career counseling sessions at a university career services center. Using growth mixture modeling, four class-trajectories were identified. Clients in class 1 had a moderate level of decision difficulties at the beginning of counseling while clients in classes 2, 3 and 4 had moderate-salient initial levels of difficulties. Clients in classes 1 and 2 experienced a very large reduction of their decision difficulties during counseling and left the process with negligible levels of difficulties. Clients in class 3 saw a large reduction of their decision difficulties during counseling and left the process with moderate levels of difficulties. Clients in class 4 did not experience change and left the process with moderate-salient levels of difficulties. Counselor adherence to the intervention manual significantly contributed to discriminate between clients from class 4 and clients from classes 1, 2 and 3. Client level of neuroticism significantly contributed to distinguish clients belonging to class 4 from clients belonging to class 1.

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)0.007
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Career AssessmentSame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207