MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102640844 · doi:10.1037/a0021004

Life on the line: Job demands, perceived co-worker support for safety, and hazardous work events.

2010· article· en· W2102640844 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational Health Psychology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaHealth and Safety Executive
KeywordsPsychologyJob satisfactionJob attitudeJob designSocial supportJob analysisApplied psychologySocial psychologyWork (physics)Job performanceOccupational safety and healthEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study of 334 United Kingdom trackside workers tested an interaction hypothesis. We hypothesized, drawing on the job demands-resources framework, that perceived support for safety (from senior managers, supervisors, and coworkers) as job resources would weaken the relationship between higher job demands and more frequent hazardous work events. Consistent with social impact theory, we predicted that perceived coworker support for safety would be particularly influential when trackside workers faced higher job demands. Moderated multiple regression showed that, of all three sources of perceived support for safety, perceived coworker support for safety was most important for keeping employees safe in the face of high job demands.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.396 · 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