The Effect of Networking on the Career Decision Self-Efficacy of Young Film and Television Professionals

Population and sampleTo find participants for the survey, this study drew from the 4,761 publicly listed members of the online group Awesome Assistants. As a result, the population was all young film/TV professionals, while the sample was the selected members of Awesome Assistants. On its Facebook page, Awesome Assistants allows film/TV professionals to post job openings and work-related questions. The author eliminated respondents younger than 18 or older than 35, and did not include moderators of Awesome Assistants. Members of the group work in the film/TV industry with either an assistant title or performing assistant duties, such as answering phones and running errands. The author randomly selected and contacted 500 individuals from this online group. The author also utilised two follow-up messages to improve the response rate.InstrumentationIn order to collect data from the sample, the author used the Career Decision Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (CDSES-SF).Data collection processTo distribute the survey to potential participants, the author sent a letter to the Awesome Assistants moderators to confirm their support. After, the author uploaded a message of informed consent and the survey to Qualtrics, then sent subjects a link to complete the study. Subjects received messages via Facebook Messenger, LinkedIn, or email, based on the contact information available. Once subjects completed the survey, a debriefing form invited them to enter a raffle for one of four $25 Amazon gift cards. After four weeks, the links expired. The author omitted surveys in which the subject did not answer at least one item from each subscale on the CDSES-SF. If respondents did not answer all items in a subscale, the author took the average of the completed questions. Additionally, the author eliminated subjects who fell outside of the target age range, as well as those who did not provide their age or number of contacts in the film/TV industry. Out of the 267 unique responses, the author analyzed 226 subjects as a result.Statistical Analysis ProceduresMuch like data collection, the author ensured that the statistical analysis process was legitimate and insightful. Next, the author entered data into IBM Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS) Statistics 27 and determined what data should be coded as missing. Due to the assumption of linearity not being met by the data, the author used Spearman’s rho instead of a Pearson product-moment correlation. The author declared the results statistically significant if p < .05.研究总体与抽样 为招募本研究的问卷参与者，本研究从线上社群Awesome Assistants的4761名公开在册成员中抽取样本。据此，本研究的总体为所有年轻影视从业者，而抽样样本则为该社群中被选中的成员。该社群在其Facebook页面上为影视从业者提供发布职位空缺及工作相关问题的交流渠道。研究者剔除了年龄未满18周岁或超过35周岁的受访者，且未纳入Awesome Assistants的社群管理员。该社群成员均任职于影视行业，职位带有助理头衔或承担助理类工作，例如接听电话、处理外勤事务。研究者从该线上社群中随机选取并联系了500名个体，同时通过发送两条跟进消息以提升有效回收率。 研究工具 为从抽样样本中收集数据，研究者采用了职业决策自我效能量表简版（Career Decision Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form，CDSES-SF）。 数据收集流程 为向潜在参与者发放问卷，研究者先致信Awesome Assistants的管理员以确认其支持。随后，研究者将知情同意书与问卷上传至Qualtrics平台，并向被试发送完成本研究的问卷链接。根据可用的联系方式，被试将通过Facebook Messenger、LinkedIn或电子邮件接收问卷消息。被试完成问卷后，研究者将通过一份研究说明告知表邀请其参与抽奖，奖品为4张25美元的亚马逊礼品卡中的一张。四周后，问卷链接失效。研究者剔除了未完成CDSES-SF各分量表至少一道题目的问卷。若受访者未完成某分量表的所有题目，研究者将以已完成题目的平均分替代该分量表得分。此外，研究者剔除了超出目标年龄范围的被试，以及未提供年龄或影视行业人脉数量的被试。最终，在267份独立有效回复中，研究者最终纳入226名被试进行数据分析。 统计分析流程 与数据收集流程一致，研究者确保统计分析过程严谨且具有学术价值。随后，研究者将数据导入IBM统计产品与服务解决方案（SPSS）Statistics 27，并确定哪些数据应被编码为缺失值。由于数据不满足线性假设，研究者采用斯皮尔曼秩相关系数（Spearman’s rho）替代皮尔逊积矩相关系数。研究者将p值小于0.05的结果判定为具有统计学显著性。