Development Of The Approaches To Work And Workplace Climate Questionnaires For Physicians
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two questionnaires were developed to investigate the workplace learning of physicians. The Approaches to Work Questionnaire for Physicians and the Workplace Climate Questionnaire for Physicians were adapted from general measures developed by Kirby, Knapper, Evans, Carty, and Gadula. These questionnaires were administered to a random sample of Ontario physicians. Consistent with the results of Kirby et al., three dimensions of approaches to work were observed: Deep. Surface-Rational, and Surface-Disorganized. Three dimensions of workplace climate were also found, Supportive-Receptive, Choice-Independence, and Workload. Results indicate that physicians adopt primarily a Deep approach to work, but that there is a smaller tendency toward Surface-Disorganized learning, one that is strongly correlated with perceptions of heavy workload. The Deep approach was associated with work environments perceived to be Supportive-Receptive and offer Choice-Independence. The use of these questionnaires in research and practice is 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it