MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122433519 · doi:10.1177/1534484313492332

Extending Theory on Job Stress

2014· article· en· W2122433519 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Resource Development Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStressorPsychologyCore self-evaluationsSituational ethicsPersonalityPerspective (graphical)Social psychologyJob performanceLocus of controlBig Five personality traitsJob stressJob designJob attitudeStress (linguistics)Job satisfactionApplied psychologyClinical psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes that the variation in perceived job stress by individuals is explained by the interaction between the situational “Other 3” dimensions (locus of control, self-monitoring, and self-efficacy) and the “Big 5” personality traits. Situational stressors primarily impact the “Other 3” dimensions in the general model. The “Other 3” dimensions mediate the stressor–job stress relationship, while the “Big 5” dimensions moderate the “Other 3”–job stress relationship. In the sequential process model, the “Other 3” dimensions and job stress are cross-lagged related to define subsequent variations in the “Other 3” dimensions of personality and job stress. This perspective is consistent with the interactional perspective, wherein personality mediates the relationship of the individual with the environment. We offer several research propositions and conclude with implications for research and practice.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.236 · 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