MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166688972 · doi:10.1177/1059601113479399

Bad Behavior in Groups

2013· article· en· W2166688972 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGroup & Organization Management · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Central Florida
KeywordsInjusticeCounterproductive work behaviorSocial psychologyPsychologyOrganizational justicePoliticsWork behaviorWork (physics)Organizational behaviorInteractional justiceEconomic JusticeWorking groupSample (material)Organizational citizenship behaviorOrganizational commitmentPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent research shows the powerful impact of counterproductive behavior in teams. This study explores how team characteristics combine to influence bad behavior in groups. It builds upon recent work in organizational justice by exploring the relationship between overall justice climate and work groups’ deviant and political behavior. Findings suggest that the structure of the work itself, in the form of functional dependence, moderates this relationship. Specifically, it is argued that the relationship between injustice climate and deviant and political behavior will be strongest when functional dependence between employees is low. Results from a sample of 539 employees and 113 supervisors in 113 work units support the hypotheses.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.009

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · 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