Support to Informal Learning at Work, Individual Performance and Impact of Training in Ampleness
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
<p>Training activities are planned considering that the psychosocial transference environment after those activities will facilitate and maximize its impact and effect on performance. This study aims to empirically test the predictive relationships between the characteristics of customers, support for informal learning, human performance and impact of training in ampleness in two Organizations located in Distrito Federal, Brazil. Data collection was face-to-face. The sample (N=315) was predominantly female (66, 9%) and had more than a year of work in the organization (85, 6%). Data were analyzed by pattern multiple regression. The results indicate that strategies of performance self-regulation<em>,</em> support to informal learning provided by the supervisor and by the work unit explained 49.5% of the variance of impact in ampleness. We suggest that future studies incorporate in their models other variables related to the composition of the organizational structure and others samples are investigated, ensuring external validity and generality.</p>
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 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