Building healthy workplaces: What we know so far.
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 2005, 37:4, 223-235 When asked to define the capabilities of a healthy person, Sigmund Freud responded “To work and to love.” Although many of his theses have not held up to empirical enquiry, Freud’s identification of an intimate connection between work and mental health is consistent with a vast body of scientific literature. Certainly, the historical record identifies paid employment as a central aspect of human experience throughout the development of civilization (see for example, Applebaum, 1984, 1992; Pahl, 1989). Moreover, the absence of paid employment has been linked to deleterious consequences for individuals and society since at least the beginning of the Industrial Revolution (Burnett, 1994; Feather, 1990; Jahoda, 1980). In the latter half of this century, Kornhauser ’s (1965) inquiries into the mental health of factory workers, and the seminal report Work in America (1973) focused attention on issues related to work stress and their implications for individual and organizational health. In 1990, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) in the United States declared occupational stress to be one of the 10 leading causes of workplace death (Sauter, Murphy, & Hurrell, 1990), and it is now common to speak of occupational stress as an epidemic (Quick, Quick, Nelson, & Hurrell, 1997). Developing healthy work and workplaces has become an important topic for organizations and researchers alike. Several initiatives toward developing healthy workplaces have been undertaken by the American Psychological Association (e.g., which offers state, provincial, and international Psychologically Healthy Workplace Awards) and the National Quality Institute (NQI; e.g., which offers a national award program, and which organizes the Nationally Healthy Workplace Week). Similarly, the Canadian Institute of Health Research currently is preparing a research strategy on workplace mental health. Therefore, the intent of this Special Issue is to highlight the contributions that psychological research has made, and will continue to make, to strategies surrounding healthy workplaces. By way of introduction to this Special Issue of the Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, we hope to achieve three interrelated goals. First, we define what we mean by a “healthy workplace,” and we delineate the ways in which work is associated with mental health. We argue that work is both a causal factor in mental and physical ill-health as well as a potential health resource that both may protect us and assist in our recovery from psychological ill-health. Second, we review the individual, organizational, and societal costs of unhealthy work and workplaces, and, consequently, of poor mental and physical health. Our argument is simply that we are incurring horrific economic and social costs when we have unhealthy workplaces. Finally, we provide a framework in terms of a healthy workplace model to help summarize this literature, and to present the articles in this Special Issue. Throughout this introduction, we emphasize that these goals are highly compatible with organizations’ traditional focus on enhancing productivity and profitability. Put simply, what is good for Canadian workers is good for Canadian industry.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,012 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle