The effect of context‐specific versus nonspecific subconscious goals on employee performance
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We investigated the effect of context‐specific versus general subconscious goals on job performance in a call center. Employees (n = 54) were randomly assigned to a condition where they were primed by (a) a photograph of people making telephone calls in a call center, (b) a woman winning a race, or (c) a control group. Job performance was measured by the (1) number of and (2) monetary value of pledges from donors. None of the participants in the two experimental conditions showed conscious awareness of a prime. Analysis of variance indicated that both a subconscious context‐specific and a subconscious general goal aroused the implicit need for achievement as assessed by a projective measure, the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT). Both types of primed goals led to a significant increase in the number of pledges during a four‐day workweek. Consistent with goal‐setting theory, employees in the context‐specific condition raised more money than those in the general achievement (one‐tailed t‐test) and control (two‐tailed t‐test) conditions. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it