Connections with Coworkers on Social Network Sites: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large number of individuals are connected with their coworkers on social network sites (SNS) that are personal and professional (e.g., Facebook), with consequences on workplace relationships. Drawing on SNS, social identity and boundary management literatures, we surveyed 202 employees and found that coworkers’ friendship-acts (e.g., liking, commenting) were positively associated with closeness to coworkers when coworkers were of the same age or older than the focal individual, and with organizational citizenship behaviors towards coworkers (OCBI) when coworkers were of the same age. Harmful behaviors from coworkers (e.g., disparaging comment) were negatively associated with closeness (but not with OBCI) when coworkers were older than the focal individual. In addition, preferences for the segmentation of one’s professional and personal roles moderated the relationship between coworkers’ friendship-acts and OCBI (but not closeness) such that the positive relationship was stronger when the focal individual had low (vs. high) preferences for segmentation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".