Stress et santé au travail chez les éducatrices en garderie : le rôle atténuateur du soutien social
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study, which focuses on the child care work environment, asks four questions : Is the state of stress among child care workers greater than that observed in a normal population? Are there aspects of the work itself that are more associated with the worker's personal state of stress? What link can we establish between the state of stress and the state of health of this group? Finally, can supportive relationships lessen the negative impact of certain work environments? 165 female workers, of which 85% are teachers, took part in the study on a volunteer basis after their child care centre had been selected arbitrarily. Subjects answered five questionnaires to measure the state of their stress, mental health, physical health, the emotional support of their spouse and the importance given to stress-related factors in the workplace. Results show that the state of stress of these workers is, on the average, no higher than that found in a normal population. However, work situations involving child supervision, interpersonal relations among staff, as well as feelings of being overworked are considered the most stressful. These work situations, even the most stress-producing, are not associated to a worker's state of physical or mental stress. It's the stress state itself, in its role as an intermediate variable, that makes the connection between sources of stress and the person's state of health. Finally, emotional support is linked to the state of stress, but has no direct link to the state of physical or mental health. A spouse's support is nonetheless considered as regular and effective protection against increases in the state of stress. A number of methodological implications are also 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".