When respect deteriorates: incivility as a moderator of the stressor-strain relationship among hospital workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To test whether incivility at work exacerbates the relationship between stressors and strain for hospital workers. BACKGROUND: A climate of incivility and disrespect among colleagues was expected to heighten the impact of work stressors on the mental and physical health of care providers. METHODS: Members of 17 care-providing units from five hospital systems in Canada completed surveys, before and after a civility intervention (eight intervention vs. nine comparison units). Analyses tested whether (1) incivility moderated the stressor-strain relationship at baseline (n=478), and (2) the stressor-strain relationship decreased for the intervention units relative to comparison units 6 months later (n=361). RESULTS: (1) Pre-intervention, individuals reporting more incivility on their unit showed a stronger stressor-strain relationship. (2) The negative relationship between work overload and mental health was mitigated among intervention group staff 6 months after the introduction of a colleague-based civility programme. CONCLUSIONS: Besides being a stressor itself, incivility exacerbates the relationship between existing job role stressors and strain among health care workers. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Colleague civility and respect have an important ripple effect of buffering inevitable work stressors, helping health care providers respond to stress with greater health and resiliency.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".