MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2491798130 · doi:10.20286/nova-jmbs-010114

Factors Contributing To the Causes of Work Related Stress and Its Impact on Performance of Teachers in Nkayi District

2012· article· en· W2491798130 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
TAlfred Champion Ncube, Thembinkosi Tshabalala

Bibliographic record

VenueNova Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicLeadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStress (linguistics)Work (physics)PsychologyEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study examined the factors that contribute to work related stress and its impact on performance of teachers, this article draws on a quantitative inquiry on causes of stress amongst teachers and its impact on their performance using a sample of 200 respondents.  The population consisted of all the 200 teachers from Nkayi District in Matabeleland North province in Zimbabwe.  The sample consisted of 200 teachers made up of 100 males and 100 females selected using purposive sampling.  All the information was gathered through a questionnaire which largely had close-ended questions and two open-ended questions. Descriptive statistical analysis was used to interpret data.  The study revealed that there were several sources of stress and these impacted negatively on the performance of teachers. It also revealed that the majority of teachers were not satisfied with their job. The study recommends that the Government should urgently take steps to improve conditions of service for teachers and there should be strategies to manage their stress levels.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.328
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.135 · 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNova Journal of Medical and Biological SciencesSame topicLeadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making StudiesFrench-language works237,207