MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966245137 · doi:10.1037//1076-8998.5.4.428

Gender differences in job strain, social support at work, and psychological distress.

2000· article· en· W1966245137 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

VenueJournal of Occupational Health Psychology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalInstitute for Work & HealthSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob strainPsychosocialPsychologySocial supportDistressPsychological distressJob controlOccupational stressClinical psychologyWork (physics)Social psychologyMental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the demand-control-support model of job strain, the authors examined gender differences in the relationship between psychosocial work exposures and psychological distress in a cross-sectional sample of 7,484 employed Canadians. Compared with low-strain work, high-strain and active work were associated with a significantly higher level of distress in both men and women. Differences in psychological distress in relation to psychosocial work exposures were greater for men than for women. Low social support was associated with higher distress across all categories of job strain, and the combined effect of low social support and high job strain was associated with the greatest increase in distress. This pattern was similar in men and women. This study suggests that psychosocial work exposures may be a more significant determinant of psychological well-being in male workers compared with female workers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.315 · 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