MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156020547 · doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00052

Employee Empowerment: An Integrative Psychological Approach

2001· article· en· W2156020547 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sanjay T. Menon

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Psychology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyEmpowermentTransformational leadershipCompetence (human resources)FeelingSocial psychologyPerceptionSample (material)Scale (ratio)PremisePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An integrative psychological approach to employee empowerment was developed based on the premise that the psychological experience of power underlies feelings of empowerment. This research extends existing perspectives on empowerment by incorporating the empowering effect of valued goals, such as those provided by transformational leadership. Goal internalisation was identified as a major component of the psychological experience of empowerment, in addition to the two traditional facets of perceptions of control over the work environment and perceptions of self‐efficacy or competence. Standard measure development procedures using a sample of employed individuals from Quebec, Canada and subsequent validation with an organisational sample from Ontario, Canada yielded a three‐factor scale of psychological empowerment corresponding to these three dimensions. The implications of defining empowerment as a psychological state and the need for multiple measures of empowerment are also 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations607
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied PsychologySame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207