MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113698416 · doi:10.1093/geronb/56.4.p234

Reactions of Older Employees to Organizational Downsizing: The Role of Gender, Job Level, and Time

2001· article· en· W2113698416 on OpenAlexaff
Marjorie Armstrong‐Stassen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series B · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Downsizing and Restructuring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsJob insecurityPsychologyScale (ratio)Government (linguistics)Job lossDemographic economicsJob attitudeSocial psychologyJob performanceJob satisfactionUnemploymentEconomicsWork (physics)Economic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This panel study examined the reactions of 187 federal government employees aged 45 and older during the initial phase of a large-scale downsizing and 20 months later. There were few significant differences in the reactions of older men and women. Respondents in management positions reported significantly more positive attitudes toward their job and the organization than did respondents in nonmanagement jobs. Compared with the initial phase of the downsizing, respondents reported a significant decrease in commitment to the organization 20 months later. For the two dimensions of job insecurity, perceived threat of job loss decreased, whereas sense of powerlessness over decisions affecting the future of one's job increased. A major area of concern for management is the low level of organizational trust and morale reported by the respondents at both time periods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series BSame topicOrganizational Downsizing and RestructuringFrench-language works237,207