MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976929543 · doi:10.1300/j022v18n02_02

Spirituality, Stress and Work

2002· article· en· W1976929543 on OpenAlexaff
Rick Csiernik, David W. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueEmployee Assistance Quarterly · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpiritualityPsychologyWorkplace spiritualityWork stressScale (ratio)Stress (linguistics)Social workSocial supportClinical psychologyWork (physics)Social psychologyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study of 154 helping professionals from seven different work environments employed five different measures to examine the impact of stress on spirituality and of spirituality on ameliorating workplace stress. Social workers and nurses reported that their workplaces were the most stressful while clergy and those working in pastoral care reported the least amount of workplace stress. Those working in funeral homes and churches reported the greatest negative impact on their spirituality by the stress of their work. It was also discovered that the greater the score on the JAREL spirituality scale the more likely respondents were to report that their workplaces had a more positive emotional climate and produced less stress. Overall, it appeared that for this non-random sample, spirituality contributed to wellness and assisted in counteracting workplace stress.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations53
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmployee Assistance QuarterlySame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207