Nurse Practitioners’ Work Values and Their Conflict Management Approaches in a Stressful Workplace: A Taiwan Study
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
Globalization has created an urgent need to understand management practices in different cultures. This study examines Confucianism-based work values of nurse practitioners in Taiwan and explores their impact on conflict management approaches in order to help health practitioners maintain sustainable work relationships and improve organizational effectiveness in an increasingly stressful workplace. Based on the data from 259 nurse practitioners in Taiwan, this study shows that nurse practitioners in Taiwan consider holistic rewards, self-fulfillment and personal growth, challenge and responsibility, autonomy, and meaningfulness as important work values. Hierarchical regression results further indicate that nurse practitioners with strong group-centered needs, such as needs for holistic rewards, preferred collaborative methods to manage conflicts in the workplace, and individuals with strong self-centered needs, such as needs for personal growth and self-fulfillment and needs for autonomy, preferred competitive methods to manage conflicts. Interestingly, this study also finds that self-centered needs such as needs for self-fulfillment and personal growth, and needs for challenge and responsibility are also related to collaborative approaches. Managerial implications are then discussed for conflict management training for nurse practitioners under stressful work conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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