MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995409360 · doi:10.1002/smi.2918

How does family support facilitate job satisfaction? Investigating the chain mediating effects of work–family enrichment and job‐related well‐being

2019· article· en· W2995409360 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStress and Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob satisfactionPsychologyJob attitudeStructural equation modelingSocial supportWork–family conflictJob designWork (physics)Core self-evaluationsJob performanceSocial psychologyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While a direct relationship between family support and job satisfaction has received empirical support, few work-family studies have examined how family support leads to job satisfaction. Drawing on the work-home resources model, we investigate the chain mediating roles of work-to-family enrichment (WFE), family-to-work enrichment (FWE), and job-related well-being on the relationship between family support and job satisfaction. Based on data collected from 439 social workers across Australia, structural equation modeling results revealed that the chain mediating effects of WFE and job-related well-being were supported. Our findings emphasize the important combination of work-family enrichment and job-related well-being in helping employees to harness support from their family members to achieve job satisfaction. We discuss both the theoretical and practical implications of the WFE, FWE, and job-related well-being mechanisms underlying the family support-job satisfaction relationship.

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 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)0.002
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.931

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.265 · 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