When Workers Flout Convention: A Study of Workplace Incivility
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: ObservationalConsensus signal: Observational
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.271
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.998
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
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
Abstract
Many organizations are concerned about the potential for workplace aggression and violence, yet pay little heed to lesser forms of interpersonal and organizational mistreatment. Drawing from knowledge and experiences of managers, attorneys, law enforcement officers and emergency medical professionals, we report a multi-method, multidisciplinary inductive study addressing two questions: (1) what is the nature of workplace incivility and how does incivility differ from and fit among other types of workplace mistreatment; and (2) what are some implications of incivility for employees and organizations?
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.
The record
- Venue
- Human Relations
- Topic
- Workplace Violence and Bullying
- Field
- Social Sciences
- Canadian institutions
- Western University
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- IncivilityWorkplace violenceLaw enforcementInterpersonal communicationPsychologyConventionAggressionSocial psychologyInterpersonal violencePublic relationsCriminologyHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlPolitical scienceLawMedicineMedical emergency
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes