Antecedents and consequences of intra-group conflict among nurses
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To test a theoretical model linking selected antecedent variables to intra-group conflict among nurses, and subsequently conflict management style, job stress and job satisfaction. BACKGROUND: A contributing factor to the nursing shortage is job dissatisfaction as a result of conflict among nurses. To develop strategies to reduce conflict, research is needed to understand the causes and outcomes of conflict in nursing work environments. METHOD: A predictive, non-experimental design was used in a random sample of 277 acute care nurses. Structural equation modelling was used to analyse the hypothesised model. RESULTS: Nurses' core self-evaluations, complexity of care and relationships with managers and nursing colleagues influenced their perceived level of conflict. Conflict management style partially mediated the relationship between conflict and job satisfaction. Job stress had a direct effect on job satisfaction and core self-evaluation had a direct effect on job stress. CONCLUSION: Conflict and its associated outcomes is a complex process, affected by dispositional, contextual and interpersonal factors. How nurses manage conflict may not prevent the negative effects of conflict, however, learning to manage conflict using collaboration and accommodation may help nurses experience greater job satisfaction. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Strategies to manage and reduce conflict include building interactional justice practices and positive interpersonal relationships.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it