MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980689467 · doi:10.1002/smi.1047

Personal and organizational outcomes related to job stress and Type‐A behavior: a study of Canadian and Chinese employees

2005· article· en· W1980689467 on OpenAlexaffabout
Muhammad Jamal

Bibliographic record

VenueStress and Health · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyJob satisfactionMainland ChinaJob stressSocial psychologyBeijingType A and Type B personality theoryOrganizational commitmentJob performanceSample (material)BurnoutChinaApplied psychologyOccupational stressClinical psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study examined the relationship of job stress, Type‐A behavior and its two components (time pressure and hard driving/competitiveness) with burnout, health problems, job satisfaction, organizational commitment and turnover motivation among employees in Canada (N = 535) and mainland China (N = 685). Data were collected by means of a structured questionnaire from Canadian employees in Montreal and Chinese employees in Beijing. Pearson correlation and moderated multiple regression were used to analyze the data. Job stress, global Type‐A and its two components were significantly related to a number of dependant variables in both countries. Some support for differential effects of Type‐A behavior components was found primarily in the Canadian sample. Implications of findings are discussed for cross‐cultural research. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations57
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStress and HealthSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207