MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Negative Consequences of Felt Violations: The Deeper the Relationship, the Stronger the Reaction

2011· article· en· W1853088217 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Psychology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAgreeablenessNeuroticismOpenness to experienceTransactional leadershipSocial psychologyExtraversion and introversionBig Five personality traitsTransactional analysisPersonalityJob satisfactionPsychological contract

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing from past research suggesting that high prior commitment leads to stronger reactions to unfairness in the workplace (Brockner, Tyler, & Cooper‐Schneider, 1992), we predicted that those forming relational as opposed to transactional psychological contracts would exhibit stronger detrimental effects of felt violation on job satisfaction, turnover intentions, and job performance. We also predicted a combined effect of personality and violation on these outcomes. Self‐ and supervisor‐reported data ( N = 331 dyads) collected from a variety of organisations supported our predictions. In general, relational contract terms were associated with stronger violation–outcome relationships, and transactional contract terms were associated with weaker relationships. Similarly, four of the Big Five dimensions (extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, and openness to experience) moderated the violation–outcome relationships such that it was stronger for higher levels of these traits.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.224 · 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