MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010435738 · doi:10.1002/smi.2939

Job resources and burnout: Work motivation as a moderator

2020· article· en· W3010435738 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueStress and Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsModerationPsychologyBurnoutSocial psychologyJob attitudeWork (physics)Job controlJob performanceControl (management)Work engagementQuality (philosophy)Applied psychologyJob satisfactionClinical psychologyManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This longitudinal study (T1 n = 399; T2 n = 279) investigated the moderating role of work motivation in the relationship between job resources (control and recognition) and burnout. Overall, job recognition and control resulted in more burnout for employees with poor-quality work motivation (high controlled or low autonomous motivation). These results suggest that poor-quality motivation renders employees more vulnerable to certain resources in their work environment, as these job characteristics stimulate compensatory behaviours (e.g., overinvesting in one's job to boost one's sense of self-worth or to obtain others' approval), leading to energy depletion over time.

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)0.000
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.229 · 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