MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169727514 · doi:10.1177/0146167201272004

Antecedents and Outcomes of Work-Family Conflict: Toward a Motivational Model

2001· article· en· W2169727514 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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyWork–family conflictSocial psychologyStructural equation modelingAlienationSpouseFeelingInterpersonal communicationWork (physics)Multilevel modelFamily conflictWork motivationDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the present study was to propose and test a model of work-family conflict based on Self-Determination Theory and the Hierarchical Model of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation. The model posits that positive interpersonal factors both at work (i.e., one’s employer) and at home (e.g., one’s spouse) influence work and family motivation. Moreover, the model proposes that low levels of self-determined family and work motivation both contribute to family alienation, which in turn influences the experience of work-family conflict. Finally, work-family conflict leads to feelings of emotional exhaustion. Results from structural equation modeling supported the model. Although the model was supported for both men and women, some sex differences were uncovered at the mean level. Theoretical implications of the findings 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.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.276 · 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