Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test a multilevel model linking unit-level leader-member exchange quality and structural empowerment to nurses' psychological empowerment and organizational commitment at the individual level of analysis. BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the contextual effects of unit leadership on individual nurse outcomes. Workplace empowerment has been related to retention outcomes such as organizational commitment in several studies, but few have studied the impact of specific unit characteristics within which nurses work on these outcomes. METHODS: We surveyed 3,156 nurses in 217 hospital units to test the multilevel model. RESULTS: A multilevel path analysis revealed significant individual and contextual effects on nurses' organizational commitment. Both unit-level leader-member exchange quality and structural empowerment had significant direct effects on individual-level psychological empowerment and organizational commitment. Psychological empowerment mediated the relationship between core self-evaluations and organizational commitment at the individual level of analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The contextual effects of positive supervisor relationships and their influence on empowering working conditions at the unit level and, subsequently, nurses' organizational commitment highlight the importance of leadership for creating conditions that result in a committed nursing workforce.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.318 | 0.158 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".