Étude de l’évolution des déterminants de l’engagement affectif
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La recherche étudie l’impact des changements apportés dans trois systèmes de GRH sur la variation de l’engagement affectif des employés d’un établissement de santé au Québec entre 1999 et 2002. La problématique de la recherche se base sur la théorie du contrat psychologique de Rousseau (1995), selon laquelle les changements organisationnels modifient les paramètres de la relation d’emploi, lesquels permettent d’améliorer les conditions de travail et le contrat psychologique de l’employé. À l’aide de deux échantillons comparables de 80 répondants, les résultats révèlent que les employés sont plus autonomes et peuvent davantage participer aux processus décisionnels, que les procédures sont plus impartiales et que la perception de plafonnement de carrière est moins élevée dans l’échantillon de 2002 comparativement à celui de 1999. Ces améliorations dans la gestion des ressources humaines sont accompagnées d’une faible augmentation du niveau d’engagement affectif en 2002.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".