The Relationship between New Career Approach Attitudes and Subjective Career Success Perceptions of Typical and Flexible Employees
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study centers on the examination of three distinct concepts, which have undergone adaptation from conventional paradigms to contemporary perspectives. These transformations pertain to the shift from typical employment arrangements to flexible employment models, the evolution from traditional career thinking to novel career approaches, and the transition from emphasizing objective career success to embracing subjective career success measures. The primary focus of this research endeavor lies in the comparative analysis of full-time and part-time employees concerning their assimilation of these new conceptual frameworks. This study aims to compare and reveal the boundaryless career attitude, protean career attitude, and subjective career success perceptions, along with their sub-dimensions, between typical employees and flexible workers, as well as to examine their relationships. The research was conducted using 895 questionnaires (412 flexible-time employees, 483 full-time employees) administered to individuals working in private employment agencies. T-test analysis was employed to test the research hypotheses and identify differences. According to the analysis results in the study, flexible workers have higher boundaryless career attitudes, psychological mobility, physical mobility, and value-driven career attitudes compared to typical workers. Regarding subjective career success, typical workers have higher than flexible-time workers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it