MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7024302619

Sacrificial goals: The antecedents and consequences of sacrificing basic psychological needs in the pursuit of career goals

2018· dissertation· en· W7024302619 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicQuasicrystal Structures and Properties
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSacrificePsychological distressCareer developmentNeed theoryPsychological researchDistressSelf-determination theoryPsychological Theory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pursuing long-term career goals often leads people to make sacrifices that can have enduring affective and self-regulatory costs.We investigated whether sacrificing basic psychological needs to reach a career goal was detrimental beyond the sacrifice of physical needs (e.g., sleep) or core activities (e.g., time with friends) using a year-long, 6-wave, prospective study of 310 young adults actively pursuing a career goal.Career goal motivation, aspirations and career demandingness were assessed at the start of a school year, while three forms of sacrifice were assessed at midyear.Psychological distress and self-regulation were assessed at both the beginning and end of the school year.Results showed that psychological need sacrifice was associated with increased psychological distress and decreased career-and personal goal progress over the year.Moreover, results suggested that psychological need sacrifice stemmed from career demandingness, introjected motivation and extrinsic aspirations.Implications of these findings for basic psychological needs theory (BPNT) and long-term goal pursuit are discussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.241 · 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