MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006737904 · doi:10.3917/riges.353.0034

La santé mentale au travail : une question de gros bon sens

2010· article· fr· W2006737904 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueGestion · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Work Dynamics
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Pourquoi est-il important d’avoir un travail qui ait un sens? Qu’est-ce qui donne un sens au travail? Dans cet article, le sens du travail est présenté comme un facteur clé de la santé mentale et du bien-être psychologique. Après avoir traité des caractéristiques individuelles qui influent sur le sens qu’une personne donne à son travail, des moyens sont offerts aux cadres, aux dirigeants et aux professionnels des ressources humaines afin que l’organisation du travail ait plus de chances d’être perçue par les employés comme ayant un sens, soit faire valoir l’utilité sociale du travail, renforcer la rectitude morale dans le travail, fournir des occasions d’apprentissage et de développement, donner de l’autonomie aux employés, se préoccuper de la qualité des relations professionnelles et reconnaître les employés.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.312 · 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