MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lead Well, Be Well

2014· other· en· W1597826694 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer L. Robertson, Julian Barling

Bibliographic record

VenueWell Being · 2014
Typeother
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAffect (linguistics)Well-beingPublic relationsEmployee engagementEmployee researchSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poor management and its negative effects on employee wellbeing is well documented in popular culture, the professional world, and academic research. Although it is important to understand the detrimental effects of leadership, a complete understanding of the effects of leadership requires that we also ask whether positive leadership has a positive effect on employee wellbeing. The purpose of this chapter is to review the academic literature that links both poor and good leadership behaviors to employee wellbeing. Specifically, in this chapter we consider the empirical evidence for any negative effects of poor leadership on employee wellbeing, and whether positive leadership can positively affect employee wellbeing. Our chapter concludes by providing directions for future research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.094

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.384 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWell BeingSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207