MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009245251 · doi:10.1177/0149206310372259

Interpersonal Injustice and Workplace Deviance

2010· article· en· W2009245251 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeviance (statistics)InjusticePsychologyInterpersonal communicationSocial psychologyOrganizational justiceMediationOrganizational commitmentSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors integrated predictions from the group value model of justice with an esteem threat framework of deviance to examine the within-person relation between interpersonal justice and workplace deviance. Using a moderated-mediation approach, they predicted that daily interpersonal injustice would lower daily self-esteem; daily self-esteem would in turn mediate the effect of daily interpersonal injustice and interact with trait self-esteem in predicting daily workplace deviance. Using 1,088 daily diary recordings from 100 employees from various industries, the results generally support the hypothesized model linking daily interpersonal justice and daily workplace deviance, even when the effects of previously established mediators (i.e., affect and job satisfaction) were controlled for. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.316 · 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