MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809031619 · doi:10.1037/ocp0000124

It hurts me too: Examining the relationship between male gender harassment and observers’ well-being, attitudes, and behaviors.

2018· article· en· W2809031619 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational Health Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHarassmentPsychologyAngerSocial psychologyDeviance (statistics)PsycINFOWitnessClinical psychologyIndustrial and organizational psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this study was to examine the costs associated with witnessing the sexual harassment of a male colleague. More specifically, we investigate (a) whether observed male gender harassment is related to psychological and physical health, and negative and positive job-related behaviors and attitudes, and (b) the mediating roles of discrete negative emotions (anger, fear) and identity-based evaluations (collective self-esteem). We explore these questions in a sample of men and women employed in "blue collar" professions. Our results show that the relationships between observed male gender harassment and psychological and physical health symptoms, withdrawal and workplace deviance, and affective commitment, were indirect and mediated via witness anger. Moreover, witnessing the gender harassment of a male colleague was also indirectly related to workplace deviance via collective self-esteem among women. Implications for theory, research, and practice are considered. (PsycINFO Database Record

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 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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.337
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.192 · 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