MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3039703282 · doi:10.1177/0734371x20939642

Emotional Well-being Among Public Employees: A Comparative Perspective

2020· article· en· W3039703282 on OpenAlex
Lihi Lahat, Dganit Ofek

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

VenueReview of Public Personnel Administration · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic sectorPerspective (graphical)Context (archaeology)BusinessWork (physics)New public managementPublic relationsPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing agreement on the importance of well-being in general and among employees more specifically. One area that has attracted significantly less attention is the well-being of public sector employees, especially from a comparative perspective. This study explored the factors explaining emotional well-being among public sector employees in seven countries. Using data from the European Social Survey, round 6, it examined the importance of the work environment, of belonging to the public sector, and of belonging to the country and their effects on well-being. We found public sector employees had a higher level of emotional well-being than non-public sector employees. However, belonging to the public sector was less important than other factors. The country context and soft features of the work environment were important to public sector employees, but not just to them, and were reflected differently in different countries.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.236 · 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