MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894045700 · doi:10.1177/1541931218621290

Predicting Stress among Pedestrian Traffic Workers Using Physiological and Situational Measures

2018· article· en· W2894045700 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexandre Marois, Daniel Lafond, Jean‐François Gagnon, François Vachon, Marie‐Soleil Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueThales (Canada)Université Laval
FundersMitacsInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsSituational ethicsSituation awarenessStress (linguistics)Applied psychologyLogistic regressionDecision treeOccupational safety and healthPsychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsStress measuresPoison controlEnvironmental healthTransport engineeringComputer scienceMedicineEngineeringSocial psychologyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traffic workers are vulnerable to accidents and must make critical decisions to avoid conflicts between road users. This can lead to high stress levels, which may hinder their capacity to mitigate the occurrence of hazards. Measuring stress on the field could represent an efficient solution to help pinpoint risky situations and identify factors that increase risk. The goal of this study was to verify whether stress among traffic workers could be predicted using physiological measures and characteristics of the work situation. Nineteen police officers in Quebec City and Montreal, Canada, performed traffic duties while their physiological activity was assessed by a wearable physiological harness. Every 15 minutes, change in subjective stress was also measured. Results showed that decision-tree models outperformed multifactorial logistic regressions for predicting subjective stress based on both situational factors and physiological measures. This demonstrated the potential of using such measures to monitor stress among traffic workers.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207