MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3007611515 · doi:10.22215/etd/2016-11712

The Impact of Gender and Subtle Sexism on Perceptions of Transformational Leadership Style and its Effect on Employee Outcomes

2016· dissertation· en· W3007611515 on OpenAlexaff
Ekaterina Martynova

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformational leadershipVignettePsychologySocial psychologyWork engagementPerceptionLeadership styleTransactional leadershipWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current research investigated the effect of transformational leadership style on employee outcomes, while taking gender and gender-related attitudes into consideration with an online sample of front-line employees (Study 1) and through an experimental vignette study with undergraduate students (Study 2).It was found that transformational leadership style positively influenced employees' hedonic and eudaimonic well-being through work engagement in the employed sample and the effect on work engagement was subsequently replicated in the email vignette study.These findings suggest that transformational leaders allow employees to become engaged at work; in turn, work engagement positively influences satisfaction and fulfillment in life.Although significant gender differences in perceptions of transformational leadership style were not found for male and female supervisors, employees' gender and subtle sexist attitudes appeared to influence perceptions of transformational leadership behaviours, such that participants who endorsed subtle sexist attitudes perceived fewer transformational leadership behaviours.

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)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior→French-language works237,207→