MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3116724415 · doi:10.23762/fso_vol8_no2_4

Is the Role of Authentic Leadership Effective in Managing Occupational Stress and Psychological Capital

2020· article· en· W3116724415 on OpenAlexaff
Adnan ul Haque, Ali Sher, Mariusz Urbański

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsYorkville University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuthentic leadershipStructural equation modelingLeadership stylePsychologyStressorApplied psychologyOccupational stressCapital (architecture)ValidityNonprobability samplingSocial psychologyReliability (semiconductor)SociologyClinical psychologyPsychometricsStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the role of an authentic leadership style in managing levels of occupational stress of employees working in the IT sectors of Pakistan and the UK. By combining strata, purposive and convenience sampling techniques, we gathered data from 220 employees working in software houses in both economies by means of a cross-sectional research design. The measurement model confirmed the reliability and validity of the distinctive variables while Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) and correlation were deployed to assess the relationship between the research variables. The findings of the study confirmed that an authentic leadership style is effective in managing occupational stress, specifically organisational and personal stressors of employees working on time-bound projects. Additionally, authentic leadership is effective in developing psychological capital. The research framework is effective for improving employees’ work efficiency through stress reduction and the development of psychological capital under an authentic leadership style.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.453
GPT teacher head0.581
Teacher spread0.128 · 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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicEmotional Intelligence and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207