MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157099214 · doi:10.1177/0886260513518841

Harm to Those Who Serve

2014· article· en· W2157099214 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryne E. Dupré, Kimberly-Anne Dawe, Julian Barling

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorkplace Violence and Bullying
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggressionPsychologyHarmSocial psychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlStructural equation modelingInjury preventionSuicide preventionDevelopmental psychologyMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While there is a large body of research on the effects of being a direct target of workplace aggression, there is far less research on the vicarious experience of aggression at work, despite the fact that more people experience workplace aggression vicariously (i.e., observe it or hear about it) than they do directly. In this study, we develop and test a model of the effects of direct and vicarious exposure to aggression that is directed at employees by customers. Structural equation modeling provided support for the proposed model, in which direct and vicarious workplace aggression influences the perceived risk of future workplace aggression, which in turn affects organizational attachment (affective commitment and turnover intentions) and individual well-being (psychological and physical). Conceptual research and policy implications 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.008

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 head0.331
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interpersonal ViolenceSame topicWorkplace Violence and BullyingFrench-language works237,207