Workplace bullying and employee performance
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research has found that the most prevalent forms of bullying in the workplace are ambiguous and difficult to detect. As a result, bullying often results in subjective interpretations of the behavior thereby inducing various possible attributions by targets. Based on findings about the misattribution of bullying behavior, we extend current conceptualizations of workplace bullying and investigate the role of targets’ attributions in explaining the relationship between workplace bullying and key dimensions of targets’ performance. We propose that different attributions can have differential effects on targets’ work performance. This contributes to the current debate and conflicting views about the effects of workplace bullying on work performance. We develop a theoretical model of bullying attributions that integrates key contextual factors across multiple levels. We propose that bullying can paradoxically result in positive effects on target performance under certain conditions. This theoretical model serves as a roadmap for future research in this area.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it