MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150931410 · doi:10.58729/1941-6687.1362

The Role of Motivational Systems and Emotions in Virtual Work

2016· article· en· W2150931410 on OpenAlexaff
Steven A. Murphy, Michael J. Hine, Sandra Kiffin‐Petersen

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications of the IIMA · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicTeam Dynamics and Performance
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAngerAnxietySocial psychologyWork (physics)AnnoyanceDistressApplied psychologyClinical psychologyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of the behavioural activation system (BAS), the behavioural inhibition system (BIS) and emotions in virtual work. BIS was found to have significant positive relationships with anger, anxiety, annoyance, nervousness, and distress. There were indications of emotional contagion between research confederates and participants. Self-report skill knowledge and the skill role of the research confederate both had significant relationships with performance. Self-report skill knowledge was fully mediated by the skill role played by the research confederate. Managers of virtual teams need to be aware of individual differences such as motivational systems and how these interact with state emotions and performance.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications of the IIMASame topicTeam Dynamics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207