A Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Context and Experience on the Scientific Career Choices of Canadian Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A longitudinal study was conducted on a sample of Canadian adolescents to track changes in science/math career choice development over a five-year span and to examine the impact of contextual and experiential factors on later choices. For the current study, five years after the initial data collection, 116 of the original participants were contacted to determine their field of study or nature of work (science or non-science). Results from a crosstabulation of gender and career choice showed a significant difference between males and females in stability of career choice. Approximately 64% of males, but only 41 % of females, remained with their original science career choice. The main reasons cited by both males and females for moving away from a science career were a change in interests, difficulty with science and math courses, and the influence of work placement. Sequential logistic regression results indicated that measures of learning experiences, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, and interests contributed significant unique variance to the prediction of scientific career choice five years later.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".