MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145151915 · doi:10.1037/1076-8998.11.1.13

Predicting and preventing supervisory workplace aggression.

2006· article· en· W2145151915 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 · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorkplace Violence and Bullying
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAggressionPsychologyInjusticeSocial psychologySanctionsPerceptionHostilityInterpersonal relationship

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors examined factors that lead to and prevent aggression toward supervisors at work using two samples: doctoral students and correctional service guards. The results supported that perceived interpersonal injustice mediates the relationship between perceptions of supervisory control over work performance and psychological aggression directed at supervisors, and further that psychological aggression toward supervisors is positively associated with physical acts of aggression directed at supervisors, supporting the notion of an escalation of aggressive workplace behaviors. Moreover, employees' perceptions of organizational sanctions (i.e., negative consequences for disobeying organizational policies) against aggression appear to play an important role in the prevention of workplace aggression by moderating the relationship between injustice and aggression targeting supervisors.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.361 · 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