The next generation of Canadian counselling psychologists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: In response to the little information available about the characteristics of counselling psychology students in Canada and their impact on the future of the specialization in Canada, 52 student members of the Canadian Psychological Association’s Section on Counselling Psychology (representing a 26 per cent response rate) were surveyed using an adapted version of a questionnaire to survey counselling psychologists in Canada. Findings: Results indicated that, in most ways, the characteristics of Canadian counselling psychology students resemble those of current counselling psychologists but some differences emerged that point to a future with an increasing female-male practitioner gender gap, more non-heterosexual counselling psychologists, and a slight growth in humanistic/person-centred theories being used. Discussion: The field will likely continue to be characterized by heterosexual female counselling psychologists of European descent, who practice primarily from either a theoretically-integrative standpoint or cognitive-behavioural theory, who intervene largely through individual counselling or psychotherapy, and almost entirely only in the English language. The results of the study are examined with respect to understanding gaps in training, professional identity, and the apparent distancing from the historical roots of the profession. The limitations of the study are noted and avenues for future research are outlined. Some comparisons with the field in other regions of the world, like the UK, are also provided.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".