Leadership styles, emotion regulation, and burnout.
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
This study investigated the potential impact of leadership style on leaders' emotional regulation strategies and burnout. Drawing on the full-range model of leadership and Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, we tested whether transformational, contingent reward, management by exception-active and -passive, or laissez-faire leadership exert direct effects on leaders' reported use of surface acting, deep acting, and genuine emotion. In turn, we hypothesized and tested the indirect effect of leadership on burnout through surface acting. Three waves of data from 205 leaders were analyzed using OLS regression. Transformational leadership predicted deep acting and genuine emotion. Contingent reward predicted both surface and deep acting. Management by exception-active and -passive predicted surface acting, and laissez faire predicted genuine emotion. The indirect effects of management by exception-active and -passive on burnout through surface acting were not significant. Indirect effects of transformational leadership and laissez-faire on burnout through genuine emotion, however, were significant. This study provides empirical evidence for the hypothesized relationships between leadership style, emotion regulation, and burnout, and provides the basis for future research and theory building on this topic.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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