The Effect of Hostile Work Environment on Organizational Alienation: The Mediation Role of the Relationship between the Leader and Followers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research aims to identify the mediation role of the relationship between the leader and followers in the context of the effect of hostile work environment on organizational alienation. To achieve this, the following scales were adopted: (Calantone & Benedetto, 1994) scale to measure the variable of hostile work environment: (Payne, 2015) scale to measure the variable of the relationship between the leader and followers; and (Kakabadse, 1986) scale to measure the variable of organizational alienation. The general co. for cars manufacturing was chosen as the field of research, and the survey questionnaire was administered to (436) individuals that comprised of (116) leaders and (320) followers. The confirmative factorial analysis (structural equation modeling) was applied as the next step, using certain descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, simple regression analysis and hierarchal regression analysis based on the mediation variable test of (Baron & Kenny, 1986). A number of conclusions have been formed, the most important of which are as follows: the hostile work environment variable has a passive effect on the relationship between the leader and followers; the variable of the relationship between the leader and the followers has a passive effect on organizational alienation; and the variable of the relationship between the leader and the followers partially mediates the relationship between the hostile work environment and organizational alienation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".