MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026279451 · doi:10.1037//1076-8998.5.3.386

Effects of perceived control on the outcomes of workplace aggression and violence.

2000· article· en· W2026279451 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 Occupational Health Psychology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorkplace Violence and Bullying
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyNeglectAggressionWorkplace violenceOccupational safety and healthPerceived controlConfirmatory factor analysisClinical psychologyAngerPerceptionHuman factors and ergonomicsInjury preventionPoison controlSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyStructural equation modelingPsychiatryMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the role of perceived control in ameliorating the negative outcomes associated with the experience of violence at work, using 2 large samples of hospital staff (N = 187) and group home staff (N = 195). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the measure of perceived control converged in suggesting a 3-factor structure consisting of Understanding, Prediction, and Influence. Results of a series of moderated regression analyses suggested that perceived control did not moderate the relationships between violence and fear or between fear and emotional well-being, somatic health, or neglect. However, perceived control was directly associated with emotional well-being and indirectly associated with somatic health and neglect. In addition, training that targets workplace violence was found to be related to enhanced perceptions of control.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.386 · 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