MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405240551 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1485935

Editorial: Advances in social constructionism and its implications for career development

2024· editorial· en· W4405240551 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Yang, Charles P. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2024
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCareer counselingPsychologyCareer developmentSocial cognitive theorySocial constructivismMainstreamSocial constructionismNarrativeMeaning-makingSense of agencySocial psychologySociologyPedagogySocial sciencePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evolution of social-constructivist and constructionist paradigms in career development can be traced back to Audrey Collin and Richard A. Young's (1986) groundbreaking work. Published in the prestigious journal Human Relations, their work elaborated on the constructivist paradigm, challenging the mainstream approaches to career counseling. Following Collin and Young's seminal work, Mark L. Savickas emerged as another fundamental figure in promoting social constructionist thought in career development. In the early 1990s, Savickas advocated the integration of narrative approaches into career counseling, which led to the development of the career construction theory (CCT). In this theory, in order to explore the dynamic and evolving nature of career development, Savickas (2005) highlighted how individuals make sense of their careers through stories. Around the same time period, R. Vance Peavy's contributions became highly influential in constructivist counseling. His socio-dynamic counseling provided a practical approach to meaning-making and explaining the interplay between personal agency and environmental influences and its influence on career development (Peavy, 2000). The early 1990s also marked the formation of the social cognitive career theory (SCCT), developed by Robert W. Lent, Steven D. Brown, and Gail Hackett. SCCT emphasized the role of self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and personal goals in career decisionmaking. Incorporating cognitive and social learning principles, this theory provided a framework for understanding how individuals' beliefs and social environments influence their career management (Lent et al., 1994).How Lee and Jung (2022) emphasized Korean individuals' adaptation to today's changing environment and concentrated on how university students cognitively regulate their emotions and how these strategies affect their career decision-making self-efficacy. This study contributes to our understanding of the cognitive processes involved in shaping career development.While these four studies explored the spectrum of social constructionism differently, central to their pursuit is the recognition of social construction mechanisms as forces influencing career trajectories in diverse societal and cultural contexts. Understanding how these mechanisms operate can provide insights into how individuals develop careers in various settings and the implications they have for career counseling.Despite Young and Collin's (2004) argument two decades ago, significant progress has not been made. The findings have been accumulated separately rather than integrally over these years, much like the work done on our research topic. Continuous efforts are essential to advance social constructionism. At the core of this endeavor to advance the study of social constructionism in the field of career management lies the empowerment of individuals' career agency and motivation (Chen, 2006(Chen, , 2015;;Chen & Hong, 2020ab). By examining the interplay among personal beliefs, societal expectations, and social networks, researchers can examine the mechanisms driving individuals to pursue and persist in their chosen career paths. This exploration helps to explain how career motivation operates between internal agency and external influences, shedding light on the complexities of career decision-making processes.Another key aspect of these ongoing studies is the construction of goals and the strategic actions taken to achieve them. Investigating how individuals perform goal-directed actions during their career pursuits provides insight into the process of career construction (Young & Valach, 2004). By examining the strategies employed to cope with barriers encountered, researchers can explain the pathways through which individuals shape their career identities and aspirations within their real-life environments.Meaning-making processes play a fundamental role in career difficulties (Chen, 2011;Kogan, 1998).Through the lens of social constructionism, future studies could explore how individuals construct narratives to understand the challenges faced in their careers (Cochran, 1990;Maree, 2019). By understanding the effective ways in which personal meanings are generated through self-reflection and dialogue regarding one's career with others, career practitioners can provide tailored support and interventions to facilitate resilience and growth.Reflective practices, both as dialogue and through dialogue, have emerged as essential tools in the contemporary career management process (Hermans, 1987(Hermans, , 1999;;McIlveen & Patton, 2007;Reid et al., 2016). Engaging individuals in reflective dialogue with themselves and others fosters selfawareness, insight, and clarity in career decision-making. They also contribute to the initiation, maintenance, and enhancement of career motivation. In particular, facilitating reflective practices within counseling settings allows counselees to explore their career narratives, challenge underlying assumptions, and explore alternative paths.In addition to career dialogues, effective career feedback serves as a catalyst for career learning, growth, and development. By providing constructive feedback grounded in social constructionist principles ( Van den Bergh, et al., 2014), career counselors, mentors, and coaches can guide individuals towards career self-management with greater self-efficacy and confidence in their career choices. Knowing how to provide useful feedback facilitates career practitioners' understanding of their counselees' strengths, values, and aspirations, thus paving the way for informed career decisions.Finally, innovative techniques such as career writing (Lengelle & Meijers, 2014;Lengelle et al., 2013Lengelle et al., , 2014)), self-confrontation (Young et al., 1994), video playback (Young et al., 1994), and the use of images, collages, and photographs (Chan et al., 2012;Chant, 2020;Ginicola et al., 2012), as well as digital storytelling (Wu & Chen, 2020), provide alternative avenues for self-reflection and narrative construction in career exploration, decision making, and management. These creative approaches allow individuals to externalize and reframe career-related problems (Chan et al., 2012;Ricks et al., 2014) and foster new perspectives and insights into career learning and development.The establishment of these techniques will contribute to the study and practice of social constructionism in the field of career development.

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 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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

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 integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207