MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050842187 · doi:10.1108/eum0000000005977

Workaholism in organizations: the role of organizational values

2001· article· en· W2050842187 on OpenAlexaff
Ronald J. Burke

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonnel Review · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicWorkaholism, burnout, and well-being
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyWork (physics)Applied psychologyGerontologySocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workaholism has received considerable attention in the popular media but little research consideration. This study, using measures of workaholic and non‐workaholic type developed by Spence and Robbins, examines the relationship of workaholic type and organizational values supporting work‐personal life balance. Data were collected from 530 women and men MBA graduates inprofessional and managerial jobs using questionnaires. The results showed that organizational values supporting work‐ personal life imbalance were significantly higher in workaholic than non‐workaholic types. Practical implications for organizations and management are offered.

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)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.286
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations102
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonnel ReviewSame topicWorkaholism, burnout, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207