MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386775938 · doi:10.53379/cjcd.2023.362

Developing Norms for the Hope-Action Inventory with a Substance Misuse Sample

2023· article· en· W4386775938 on OpenAlex
Lauren Currie, Robinder P. Bedi

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Career Development · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOptimism, Hope, and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsSubstance useNormativeSubstance misusePsychologyVocational educationAction (physics)Sample (material)Amazon rainforestClinical psychologySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMental healthPsychiatryPolitical sciencePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hope-Action Inventory (HAI), a hope-based measure of career competencies, has demonstrated solid predictive validity for educational and vocational outcomes. The purpose of this study was to justify an expansion of the use of the HAI by examining group differences and establishing norms for interpreting HAI results with individuals with a history of substance misuse. Participants (N = 783) were recruited through substance use support centers and the Amazon Mechanical Turk online recruitment platform. Significant group differences were found among differing employment statuses and age groups. Normative data on the HAI with substance use populations are provided by age and employment status.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.207 · 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