MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1962102214 · doi:10.1111/jasp.12298

On feeling good at work: the role of regulatory mode and passion in psychological adjustment

2014· article· en· W1962102214 on OpenAlexaff
Jocelyn J. Bélanger, Antonio Pierro, Arie W. Kruglanski, Robert J. Vallerand, Nicola De Carlo, Alessandra Falco

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Social Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPassionPsychologyFeelingSocial psychologyBurnoutWork (physics)Mode (computer interface)Clinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The major postulate of this work is that regulatory modes influence the type of passion people experience with regard to an activity, which in turn influences their psychological adjustment. Integrating regulatory mode theory and the dualistic model of passion, we hypothesized that locomotion—associated with intrinsic and autonomous motivations—would positively predict harmonious passion, which in turn would enhance workers' psychological adjustment. In contrast, we hypothesized that assessment—associated with extrinsic and non‐autonomous motivations—would positively predict obsessive passion, which in turn would reduce workers' psychological adjustment. Two field studies supported these hypotheses with psychological adjustment measures of stress (Study 1) and burnout (Study 2) in different work contexts.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.314 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations47
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Social PsychologySame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207