Exploring the relationship between individual cultural values and employee silence
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study examines the relationship between individual cultural values and employee silence among nurses, medical laboratory technologists, and primary care paramedics in Canada. The study has four parts: Part A looks at the relationship between power distance, uncertainty avoidance, quiescent silence, and acquiescent silence. It also investigates the mediating role of psychological safety, using the Sobel formula and bootstrapping techniques. Part B investigates the relationship among collectivism, long-term orientation, competition, prosocial silence, and opportunistic silence. Part C investigates how the three professions use their silence in the workplace and Part D examines their perceptions relating to power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and competition. The study comprised 378 healthcare professionals including 156 registered nurses, 115 medical laboratory technologists, and 107 primary care paramedics. Part A results indicate that, for the professions combined, uncertainty avoidance and power distance have positive relationships with acquiescent silence but not with quiescent silence. These results are not replicable for the professions separately, indicating there are differences in cultural values among nurses, medical laboratory technologists and primary care paramedics. Across the professions, psychological safety has mediating roles between uncertainty avoidance, and both acquiescent and quiescent silence. However, psychological safety has no mediating role between power distance and acquiescent or quiescent silence. For the professions separately, these results are not replicable. The relationships among collectivism, competition and long-term orientation, prosocial silence and opportunistic silence are also investigated in Part B. Collectively, the three professions show significant relationships between competition and opportunistic silence, competition and prosocial silence, and collectivism and prosocial silence. These patterns are not replicable when each profession is examined separately. In Part C, both MANOVA and latent variable means indicate significant differences in the mean cultural values among the three professions. However, latent variable means and the post hoc tests disagree on the sub-construct differences between nurses and primary care paramedics, and between medical laboratory technologists and primary care paramedics. This implies that each individual construct will not be a good predictor for all three professions. Both MANOVA and latent variable means suggest significant differences in perceptions of individual cultural values among nurses, primary care paramedics, and medical laboratory technologists in Part D. Here also, latent variable means and the post hoc tests disagree on the differences of the sub-constructs between nurses and medical laboratory technologists, and between nurses and primary care paramedics. This study has implications for healthcare administrators who will need to develop communication and reporting policies that fit these three professions, especially the medical laboratory technologists. This group exhibits a positive relationship between power distance and acquiescent silence. These employees might most benefit from a workplace that is conducive to speaking up and a leader who seriously listens and legitimizes their concerns.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,011 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».