MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148004353 · doi:10.1002/job.1798

An empirical analysis of surface acting in intra‐organizational relationships

2012· article· en· W2148004353 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Organizational Behavior · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmotional Labor in Professions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychologyEmotional laborSample (material)Test (biology)Empirical researchApplied psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Prior research analyzing surface acting—employees' regulation of emotional expressions—has mostly focused on the interactions between front‐line employees and their customers in service industries and paid very little attention to intra‐organizational relationships. With an aim to shed light on this important yet relatively unexplored area, I developed a theoretical model analyzing the antecedents and outcomes of surface acting within organizations, by drawing on the sociometer theory and self‐presentation theory frameworks. To test the model, I conducted a cross‐level field study in a sample of 65 work groups and 478 employees in two organizations, located in a large city in Northern California. I have collected the data from two sources, including employees and their supervisors who rated their performance. Results indicated that employees were more likely to engage in surface acting when their affective traits and personal goals were less congruent with work environment. Surface acting was also positively related to perceived organizational politics and self‐monitoring. As for outcomes, surface acting was positively related to emotional exhaustion and negatively to performance. I discuss limitations, implications, and future research direction. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.338 · 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