• 의학교육논단
• /
• 제26권1호
• /
• pp.27-35
• /
• 2024

Medical students' career choices hold significant importance at both individual and national levels. Therefore, Chungnam National University College of Medicine aimed to systematize its revised career fair in 2022, basing its efforts on a career planning process model. Chungnam National University College of Medicine sought to formalize the design process by utilizing the ADDIE model (analysis design, development, implementation, evaluation model) in developing programs for the career fair program. Throughout the entire process, the student support center and student council actively collaborated, striving to incorporate students' requests and opinions. They designed and developed a program for all stages of the career planning process. However, a new stage ("review & ref lection") was added to the existing 4-phase model, creating a transformed framework where this stage interacts with the original 4 phases. Each stage involved portfolios, career aptitude tests, career-related lectures, posters with introductory information about majors, and booths for each major. The revised career fair attracted double the expected participants (N=589). The program evaluation survey showed overall positive responses (N=135). Additionally, some factors in the Specialty Indecision Scale showed significant differences between before and after the career fair. The success of the newly developed career fair at Chungnam National University College of Medicine can be attributed to its systematic framework and the active involvement of students throughout the process. However, for aspects with long-term implications, such as "understand yourself " and "choose your specialty," there may be a need for supplementary programs.

• 대한간호학회지
• /
• 제28권3호
• /
• pp.751-759
• /
• 1998

The study of the validity test on the self-monitoring scale for nurses In this study, both the literary survey as well as empirical research has been executed to test the validity of the scales that measure the construct of the self-monitoring scale. The self-monitoring scale could not be classified into five factors as Snyder suggested. Many other scholars (Briggs, Cheek and Buss, 1980) suggested 3 different classifications which was accepted by Snyder and Gangestad (1986). John, Cheek and Klohnen(1996) claimed a two-factor classification. As has been discussed, factor analysis is used to prove convergent validity within the factor and discriminant validity between the factors. However, depending on the researchers, many variations in classification of the factors were found and a lack of content and discriminant validity were found in the previous research findings. It is also important to note that Snyder's self-monitoring scale did not factor-load at over. 30 for all 25 items, regardless of how many factors could be classified. According to findings of this study, the self-monitoring scale neither classified as five, three or two factors nor factor loaded as hypothesized. It is also clear that Snyder's self-monitoring scale lacks convergent validity as the sub-factors of the scale failed to prove its uni-dimensionality. The A self-monit oring scale not only fail to overcome the problems of Snyder's self-monitori ng scale but even lost the attractiveness of the self-monitoring scale. In this study it was also found that the A self-monitoring scale was not classified in either in a two or three-factor classification as hypothesized. It is, of course, not desirable to use any scale that lacks convergent and discriminant validity even though it has been widely used and has held a great deal of influence on the field of social psychology. To overcome the shortcomings of Snyder's self-monitoring scale, Lennox and Wolfe(1984) suggested 13 items. This study was dedicated to test the validity and reliability of the scale, in which we found that the data presented in validity as the two factors were class ified and loaded as expected. Reliability was also proven by checking Cronbach's α for each factor and for the total items. In addition, a confirmatory factor analysis was executed for the 13 items using LISREL 8.12 program to confirm convergent validity in a two-factor classification. The model was fitting and sound : however, the self-monitoring scale was unfitted and not validated. Thus, it is recommended to use not the original nor the abbreviated self-monitoring scale but the 13 items in future studies. It should also be noted that items 7 and 13 should be removed to obtain better uni-dimensionality for the 13 items. These items loaded at over. 30, too high for the two factors in the test results of Factor analysis. In addition, it is necessary to double-check the cause of two-hold loading at over .30 for the two factors. It could be a problem caused by data or by the scale itself. Therefore, additional studies should follow to better clarify this matter.

• 한국항해항만학회지
• /
• 제35권10호
• /
• pp.823-827
• /
• 2011

2016년 7월부터 강제 적용 예정인 목표기반 선박건조 기준(GBS)의 설계단계의 기능요건 중 잔류강도 평가 부분은 현재의 유조선설계, 건조 규칙인 공통구조규칙에는 아직 포함되어 있지 않은 실정이다. 기능요건에 포함된 잔류강도 부분은 충돌이나 좌초와 같은 해상사고시 발생가능한 선체손상을 고려하여 강도측면의 제한조건을 규정함으로써 사고시에도 일정부분 선박의 안전을 확보하려는 것이다. GBS에서 주로 다루고 있는 위험도에 근거하여 잔류강도를 평가하기 위해서는 다양한 손상에 대한 광범위한 평가 작업이 필요하다. 이때, 매번 비선형 유한요소해석을 수행하기보다 선체구조를 보강판 요소의 집합으로 보는 간이화된 강도 해석법의 하나인 Smith법이 유용할 것이다. 본 연구에서는 좌초사고로 인해 선저가 손상된 경우를 대상으로 Smith법을 적용하여 최종강도 평가를 수행하였으며, 3개의 화물창 구역을 모델링하여 수행한 비선형 구조해석 결과와의 비교를 통해 Smith법을 적용한 결과의 정도를 확인하였다.

• 여성건강간호학회지
• /
• 제4권2호
• /
• pp.173-186
• /
• 1998

In this study, both the literary survey as well as empirical research has been executed to test the validity of the scales that measure the construct of self-monitoring scale could not be classified into five factors as Snyder suggested. Many other scholars (Briggs, Cheek and Buss, 1980) suggested 3 different classifications which was accepted by Snyder and Gangestad (1986). John, Cheek and Klohnen (1996) claimed a two-factor classification. As has been discussed, factor analysis is used to prove convergent validity within the factor and discriminant validity between the factors. However, depending on the researchers, many variations in classification of the factors were found and a lack of content and discriminant validity was found in the previous research findings. It is also important to note that Snyder's self-monitoring scale, did not factor-load at over 30 for all 25 items, regardless of how many factors could be classified. According to findings of this study, the self-monitoring scale neither classified as five, three or two factors nor factor loaded as hypothesized. It is also clear that Snyder's self-monitoring scale lack convergent validity as the sub-factors of the scale fail to prove its uni-dimensionality. The A self-monitoring scale not only fail to overcome the problems of Snyder's self-monitoring scale but even lost the attractiveness of the self-monitoring scale. In this study, it was also found that the A self-monitoring scale was not classified as hypothesized in either in a two or three-factor classification. It is, of course, not desirable to use any scale that lacks convergent and discriminant validity even though it has been widely used but also has held a great deal of influence on the field of social psychology. To overcome the shortcomings of Snyder's self-monitoring scale, Lennox and Wolfe(1984) suggested 13 items. This study 1. was dedicated to test the validity and reliability of the scale, in which we found that the data presented in validity as the two factors were classified and loaded as expected. Reliability was also proven by checking Cronbach's alpha for each factor and for the total items. In addition, a confirmatory factor analysis was executed for the 13 items using LISREL 8.12 program to confirm convergent validity in a two-factor classification. The model was fitting and sound ; however, the self-monitoring scale was unfitted and not validated. Thus, it is recommended to use not the original or the abbreviated self-monitoring scale but the 13 items in future studies. It should also be noted that items 7 and 13 should be removed to obtain better uni-dimensionality for the 13 items. These items loaded at over .30, too high for the two factors in the test results of factor analysis. In addition, it is necessary to double-check the cause of two-hold loading at over .30 for the two factors. It could be a problem caused by data or by the scale itself. Therefore, additional studies should follow to better clarify this matter.

• 한국문헌정보학회지
• /
• 제46권4호
• /
• pp.119-146
• /
• 2012

백운화상이 제시한 '무심(無心)'에 관하여 분석한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, '무심(無心)'을 우리말로 번역할 때에는 (1) '마음씀이 없음', (2) '마음이라 할 것도 없음', (3) '마음 없음' 등으로, 해당 게송(偈頌) 등의 문맥에 따라 옮기는 것이 합리적이다. 둘째, 백운화상의 무심(無心)은 '평상시의 일없는 마음(평상무사저심(平常無事底心): 평상심(平常心))'이며 '내려놓음(방하착(放下着))'이면서 동시에 '깨달음의 성품(진여지성(眞如之性))'을 의미한다. 이러한 무심(無心)은 달마조사의 '사람의 마음을 곧장 가리켜 자신의 성품을 꿰뚫어 보아 깨달음을 얻음(직지인심(直指人心) 견성성불(見性成佛))' 및 석가모니의 '내려놓음(방하착(放下着))' 게송에 계합(契合)하고 있다. 그리하여 이 무심(無心)은 '구하거나 집착하는 마음씀이 없음'이며 "평상시의 일없는 마음으로, 일상생활에서 몸과 마음을 놓아버리고(방하착(放下着)) 다만 '마음씀이 없음(무심(無心))'이기만 하면, 저절로 깨달을 것이다"라고 경험적 깨달음을 제시하고 있음을 파악하였다. 셋째, 백운화상의 무심(無心)을 "직지"에 수록된 '과거7불' 및 '서천 6조사' 등의 게송 내용과 비교분석한 결과, 석가모니의 '방하착' 및 서천조사 등의 '즉비(卽非)의 중도적 관점' 등의 사상을 견지(堅持)하고 있음을 확인하였다. 그러므로 '무심(無心)'을 특히 강조한 백운화상의 '무심선'은 달마선종이나 육조혜능의 선법(禪法) 및 임제종 조사선(祖師禪)의 본질을 가장 명확하게 계승하여 밝힌 선법임을 파악하였다.

• Asia Marketing Journal
• /
• 제15권4호
• /
• pp.131-159
• /
• 2014

Corporate rebranding has been evident in the qualitative corporate rebranding studies as an imposed organizational change that induces mixed reactions and ambivalent attitudes among consumers. Corporate rebranding for the established and familiar corporate brands leads to more ambivalent attitudes as these companies represent larger targets for disparaging information. Consumers are found to hold both positive and negative reactions toward companies and brands that they are familiar with. Nevertheless, the imposed change assumption and ambivalent attitude, in particular corporate rebranding, have never been widely explored in the quantitative corporate rebranding studies. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive empirical examination of the ambivalence towards rebrandingrebranded brand attitude-purchase intention relationships. The author proposes that corporate rebranding for familiar corporate brands is a double-edged sword that not only raises the expectation for better performance, but also induces conflicted and ambivalent attitudes among consumers. These consumers' ambivalent attitudes are influenced by both the parent brands-related and general attitude factors which further affect their rebranded brand attitude and purchase intention. A total of 156 useable questionnaires were collected from Malaysian working adults; and two established Malaysian airfreight operators were utilized as the focal parent brands. The study found a significant impact of prior parent brand attitudes on ambivalence towards rebranding (ATR). The parent brand attitudes served as anchors in influencing how new information was processed (Mazaheri et al., 2011; Sherif & Hovland, 1961) and closely related to behavioral intention (Prislin & Quellete, 1996). The ambivalent attitudes experienced were higher when individuals held both positive and negative reactions toward the parent brands. Consumers also held higher ambivalent attitudes when they preferred one of the parent brands; while disliked the other brand. The study also found significant relationships between the lead brand and the rebranded brand attitude; and between the partner brands and ATR. The familiar but controversial partner brand contributed significantly to the ambivalent attitudes experienced; while the more established lead brand had significant impact on the rebranded brand attitude. The lead and partner brands, though both familiar, represented different meanings to consumers. The author attributed these results to the prior parent brand attitudes, the skepticism and their general ambivalence toward the corporate rebranding. Both general attitude factors (i.e. skepticism and general ambivalence towards rebranding) were found to have significant positive impacts on ATR. Skeptical individuals questioned the possibility of a successful rebranding (Chang, 2011) and were more careful with their evaluations toward 'too god to be true' or 'made in heaven' pair of companies. The embedded general ambivalent attitudes that people held toward rebranding could be triggered from the associative network by the ambiguous situation (Prislin & Quellete, 1996). In addition, the ambivalent rebranded brand attitude was found to lower down purchase intention, supporting Hanze (2001), Lavine (2001) and van Harreveld et al. (2009)'s studies. Ambivalent individuals were found to prefer delay decision making by choosing around the mid-ranged points in 'willingness to buy' scale. The study provides several marketing implications. Ambivalence management is proven to be important to corporate rebranding to minimize the ambivalent attitudes experienced. This could be done by carefully controlling the parent brands-related and general attitude factors. The high ambivalent individuals are less confident with their own conflicted attitudes and are motivated to get rid of the psychological discomfort caused by these conflicted attitudes (Bell & Esses, 2002; Lau-Gesk, 2005; van Harreveld et al., 2009). They tend to process information more deeply (Jonas et al., 1997; Maio et al., 2000; Wood et al., 1985) and pay more attention to message that provides convincible arguments. Providing strong, favorable and convincible message is hence effective in alleviating consumers' ambivalent attitudes. In addition, brand name heuristic could be utilized because the rebranding strategy sends important signal to consumers about the changes that happen or going to happen. The ambivalent individuals will pay attention to both brand name heuristic and rebranding message in their effort to alleviate the psychological discomfort caused by ambivalent attitudes. The findings also provide insights to Malaysian and airline operators for a better planning and implementation of corporate rebranding exercise.