Perceived organizational support for safety and employee safety voice: The mediating role of coworker support for safety.
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
In the present study, we modeled 2 sources of safety support (perceived organizational support for safety and perceived coworker support for safety) as predictors of employee safety voice, that is, speaking out in an attempt to change unsafe working conditions. Drawing on social exchange and social impact theories, we hypothesized and tested a mediated model predicting employee safety voice using a cross-sectional survey of urban bus drivers (n = 213) in the United Kingdom. Hierarchical regression analysis showed that perceived coworker support for safety fully mediated the relationship between perceived organizational support for safety and employee safety voice. This study adds to the employee voice literature by evaluating the important role that coworkers can play in encouraging others to speak out about safety issues. Implications for research and practice related to change-oriented safety communication are 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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 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) | 0.001 | 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