MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029495589 · doi:10.1348/096317900166868

Interactive effects of absence culture salience and group cohesiveness: A multi‐level and cross‐level analysis of work absenteeism in the Chinese context

2000· article· en· W2029495589 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGroup cohesivenessSalience (neuroscience)PsychologyAbsenteeismSocial psychologyGroup workCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the interactive effects of group cohesiveness and absence culture salience on absence proposed by Johns and Nicholson (1982). It was hypothesized that group cohesiveness and absence culture salience would be negatively related to work‐group absence. Emphasis was placed on the interactive effects of cohesiveness and cultural salience on work‐group absence rate and employee self‐reported absence. In addition, the potential mediating effect of group absence norms was explored. Survey responses were collected from 800 employees in a state‐owned manufacturing enterprise in the People's Republic of China. Aggregate measures of salience and cohesiveness each had a negative relationship with work‐group absenteeism. Consistent support for the interactive effects of cohesiveness and salience was provided by group, individual, and cross‐level analyses. Group absence norms mediated the effects of cohesiveness, cultural salience, and their interaction on self‐reported absenteeism.

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)0.000
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.345 · 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