MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013324992 · doi:10.1080/1359432x.2014.894978

Opening the black box: Why and when workplace exclusion affects social reconnection behaviour, health, and attitudes

2014· article· en· W2013324992 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin L. Scott, Stefan Tams, Michaéla C. Schippers, Ki-Young Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBelongingnessSocial psychologySocial exclusionPsychologyPerceptionAffect (linguistics)CitizenshipSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By integrating belongingness theory and the sensitivity about being the target of a threatening upward comparison (STTUC) theory, we explicate a process through which co-worker exclusion is positively related to social reconnection behaviour in the workplace. Specifically, we argued and found that exclusion prompts ingratiatory and citizenship behaviours via the perception of being envied by colleagues. Despite these positive outcomes, we also found the mediated relationship of exclusion and perceptions of being envied to be damaging to workers’ psychological health and work-related attitudes, and that these relationships were the strongest among employees with high positive affect (PA). We tested our model across two distinct samples that included full-time Dutch (Study 1) and American (Study 2) employees. Implications for theory and practice 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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations75
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Work and Organizational PsychologySame topicDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionFrench-language works237,207