Can meaningful work really moderate the relationship between supervisor support, coworker support and work Engagement?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Work engagement has gained much prominence over the recent decades. With the aim of addressing the global engagement crisis, the current study examined how prominent job resources such as supervisor support, coworker support and meaningful work perceptions can influence work engagement. The study also tested the moderation of meaningful work on these relationships. 537 questionnaires were distributed among the employees of six large banks of Pakistan. Structural equation modeling using Smart PLS 2.0 resulted in strong positive relationship of supervisor support and coworker support with work engagement. The findings also concluded strong positive relationship between meaningful work and work engagement. Notably, the bootstrapping results also played significant moderation of meaningful work on the relationship between supervisor support and coworker support with work engagement. The study forwards theoretical and practical implications for future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it