MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Relationship of Empowerment and Selected Personality Characteristics to Nursing Job Satisfaction

2002· article· en· W2094022925 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

VenueJONA The Journal of Nursing Administration · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob satisfactionPersonalityPsychologyEmpowermentNursingApplied psychologySocial psychologyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study reports on a secondary data analysis undertaken to better understand the determinants of job satisfaction for hospital nurses. Both workplace and personal factors can contribute to job satisfaction. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: Kanter's theory of structural empowerment and Spreitzer's theory of psychological empowerment explain logical outcomes of managerial efforts to create structural conditions of empowerment. Selected personal attributes were also considered. METHOD AND SAMPLE: Instruments used were 1) Conditions for Work Effectiveness Questionnaire; 2) psychological empowerment tool; 3) a mastery scale; 4) an achievement scale; and 5) a job satisfaction scale. The sample of 347 nurses (58% response rate) came from all specialty areas. RESULTS: Structural and psychological empowerment predicted 38% of the variance in job satisfaction. Achievement and mastery needs were not significant. Other personal attributes can be found in future research to improve job satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Through careful manipulation of the hospital environment, both structural and psychological empowerment can be increased, resulting in greater job and patient satisfaction and, ultimately, improved patient outcomes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.291 · 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