MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112218059 · doi:10.7359/952-2020-bal5

How to manage stress at the workplace: neuroscientific applications

2020· book-chapter· en· W3112218059 on OpenAlexaff
Michela Balconi, Laura Anioletti

Bibliographic record

VenueIRCCAN · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsWorkplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyStress (linguistics)Applied psychologyPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

FRAMEWORK OF STRESS AT THE WORKPLACEHistorically, stress has been defined as an aspecific response of the organism to any form of exogenous or endogenous stimulus that, due to its duration or intensity, is capable of triggering adaptation mechanisms to face the stimulus and restore homeostasis (Selye, 1975).Despite this definition could be criticized as too simplistic, since it leaves out the contextual factors and appraisal mechanisms (Matthews et al., 2017), it contains the assumption that stress can be considered a basic adaptation reaction to a positive or negative event.Stress responses are essential for triggering the organism and for addressing an event or situation appropriately.In this way, stress encourages a controlled reaction in which the individual feels to have sufficient skills and resources to respond to the context's demands and initiates a productive problem-solving process.On the other hand, when the action of the stressor agent is too severe and lasts for long, such processes of physiological adaptation begin to fail, homeostatic regulatory mechanisms become less efficient, and the stress response becomes dysfunctional (Dhabhar, 2014).Therefore, extremely low, and extremely high stress levels are linked to a drop in cognitive performance and the lack of adaptive responses, while optimal levels of performance are settled in the middle of the stress curve.Intense and chronic exposure to severe stressors may have relevant clinical implications, however, the same sequence of physiological and psychological events occurs

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIRCCANSame topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207