MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Cluster Approach to Emotional Labor

2017· article· en· W2736567101 on OpenAlexaff
A.V. Sizykh, Nealia S. Bruning

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmotional Labor in Professions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotional laborEmpathyBurnoutPsychologyHealth careCoping (psychology)Context (archaeology)PersonalityEmotional exhaustionEmotional contagionSocial psychologyClinical psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emotional labor is an important component of healthcare employees’ jobs. The ability to regulate the emotions impacts the well-being of patients and their families as well as caretakers. Emotional demands in healthcare context are high, and involve management of a wide range of emotions, coping with adverse and unpleasant events, and showing empathy which is unique to the context of caretaking. A common approach to emotional labor is to differentiate between surface actors and deep actors. Due to the complex nature of emotional work in healthcare, it might not be a sufficiently nuanced approach. We propose an approach that allows differentiating between five clusters of emotional labor actors. Moreover, we explore the personality differences between the five clusters and their experience of burnout.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicEmotional Labor in ProfessionsFrench-language works237,207