Workplace Psychological Aggression, Job Stress, and Vigor: A Test of Longitudinal Effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to examine the relationships between supervisor- and customer-initiated psychological aggression and vigor across time, and to determine the mediating role of job stress in these relationships. We also investigated the potential for differential impacts of supervisor and customer aggression on our outcome variables. A two-wave longitudinal study was conducted with a time lag of 6 months. The study sample consisted of 215 branch office employees of five large commercial banks situated in Islamabad, Pakistan. Data were collected using a self-administered questionnaire and analyzed using covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM). It was found that Time 1 supervisor and customer aggression were negatively related to Time 2 vigor, and these relationships were partially mediated by job stress. Contrary to our expectations, however, we found no significant differences between Time 1 supervisor and customer aggression in relation to Time 2 job stress and Time 2 vigor. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. We extended research on multifoci approach to workplace aggression and empirically examined the direct and mediated effects of supervisor- and customer-initiated psychological aggression on vigor.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".