Appraisal of Strategy Adopted by Construction Professionals for Coping with Stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stress has been identified as a significant hindrance to construction professional’s performance on site. Unfortunately, stress cannot be eliminated on site, but it can only be managed with different stress coping strategies. Therefore, this study aimed at appraising the strategy adopted by construction professionals for coping with stress. Although past studies have examined strategies adopted for dealing with the stress from two dimensions namely: problem-solving and emotional based stress coping strategies. This study introduced the third dimension and called it acceptance a hybrid of previous dimensions. It also appraised the strategy adopted by construction professionals for coping with stress based on their working experience. Convenience sampling method was used in gathering data from selected construction professionals in Lagos state Nigeria. A total of 62 questionnaires were obtained from the professionals out of 70 that were distributed. The data were analysed with statistical package for social science (SPSS version 24), using, mean score and Kruskal Wallis test. The findings from the Kruskal Wallis revealed that the strategy for coping with stress coping is dependent on the construction professionals working experience. The study concludes that communication is a crucial element for coping with construction stress. The study recommends that construction firms and project managers should provide opportunities for construction workers to communicate among themselves. The findings from this study will be useful for project managers and construction firms in Nigeria towards ameliorating the adverse effect of stress among construction professionals.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".