Social and Psychological Support for Personnel in Organisations: Work-Life Balance Programmes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The study aimed to explore the work-life balance concept, assessing the level and the peculiarities of work-life balance. Background: The paper covers the psychological reconstruction of the concept of "the work-life balance" in terms of its implicit understanding and differentiated diagnosis. Method: The main research methods are: theoretical – the study of literature on the research problem; empirical – a study on the methodology for assessing psychological well-being, as well as methods of descriptive and analytical statistics. Results: It has been designed an inventory based on 16 statements divided into the work-life balance components by means of the factor analysis. Satisfaction with work and family roles have been found to have additive effects on happiness, life satisfaction, and perceived quality of life. The basic strategies in social and psychological programs in organisations have been analysed as focus strategies, "resource/refusal" strategies, adaptive strategies. Adaptive strategies are the ones helping to adapt to problems arising at work or/and at home. Conclusion: Empirical findings suggest that involvement in multiple roles can improve psychological and mental health by buffering negative effects such as reduced. The use of individual adaptive strategies with the resource increase strategy perfectly contributes to the work-life balance achievement.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".