MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147092711 · doi:10.5539/ass.v8n9p2

Agreeableness and Conscientiousness as Antecedents of Deviant Behavior in Workplace

2012· article· en· W2147092711 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hadi Farhadi, Fatimah Omar, Rohany Nasir, Wan Shahrazad Wan Sulaiman

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConscientiousnessAgreeablenessPsychologyBig Five personality traitsSocial psychologyPersonalityHierarchical structure of the Big FiveOpenness to experienceBig Five personality traits and cultureExtraversion and introversion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, there has been an increase in the interest of workplace deviant behavior (WDB) among industrial and organizational psychologists. Many scholars believe that WDB decreases overall organizational productivity. The main purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of both agreeableness and conscientiousness (two factors of big five model of personality traits) with deviant behavior. The study also looked at the role of two demographic factors (gender and age) on deviant behavior in workplace. Data were collected from 212 subjects who were working as civil servants in Malaysia using a set of questionnaire that measures the variables studied. The results showed that personality traits predicted workplace deviant behavior. There were negative relationships between agreeableness and conscientiousness with workplace deviance. Although the findings of the present study showed differences in WDB between subjects with different age levels, it was unable to find differences in WDB between subjects with different gender. Implications for future research are 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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations45
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicPersonality Traits and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207