MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976178392 · doi:10.1080/08959280903400184

Effects of Perceived Responsibility, Injury Severity, and Injury Target on Discipline Severity

2009· article· en· W1976178392 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Performance · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Lethbridge
KeywordsPsychologyInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsSocial psychologyWork (physics)Injury Severity ScoreReading (process)Poison controlClinical psychologyMedicineMedical emergencyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the effects of injury severity, injury target, and perceived responsibility on supervisors' discipline severity following a rule violation. Participants made discipline judgments after reading scenarios describing work rule violations. Data revealed an Injury Severity × Injury Target interactive effect on discipline severity. Respondents disciplined rule violators more severely when the behavior caused a serious coworker injury than when the violating behavior caused a minor coworker injury. Discipline severity decreased as the severity of the injury the rule violator experienced increased. That finding goes against conventional wisdom stating that a positive linear relation exists between the extent of an injury and discipline severity and suggests that supervisors might not make all discipline judgments in a simple, linear fashion.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.404 · 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