MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979081438 · doi:10.1177/0312896219877679

When does job dissatisfaction lead to deviant behaviour? The critical roles of abusive supervision and adaptive humour

2019· article· en· W2979081438 on OpenAlexaff
Dirk De Clercq, Inam Ul Haq, Muhammad Umer Azeem

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbusive supervisionPsychologyHarmSocial psychologyFeelingPossession (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With a basis in conservation of resources theory, this study investigates the relationship between employees’ sense of job dissatisfaction and their engagement in deviant behaviour, as well as the moderating roles that their exposure to abusive leadership and possession of adaptive humour skills can play in this process. Based on two-way survey data collected from employees in Pakistan, the findings show that employees’ unhappy feelings about their job situations enhance the likelihood that they undertake negative behaviours that can harm their organization, especially when they suffer from abusive leadership or lack adaptive humour skills. The buffering effect of their adaptive humour on the positive relationship between job dissatisfaction and deviant behaviour is also particularly salient in the presence of abusive leadership. JEL Classification: D23, D91, M50

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of ManagementSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207