La dynamique du stress au travail est-elle transactionnelle?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le modèle transactionnel du stress est l'un des modèles explicatifs les mieux connus. Par un mécanisme de double évaluation, cette perspective cognitivo-phénoménologique propose que l'état de stress émane d'une inadéquation entre les demandes contextuelles et les ressources personnelles. Peu de validations intégrales de ce modèle ont été effectuées jusqu’à maintenant. Cette étude propose une vérification de l’ensemble de la dynamique transactionnelle du stress en contexte professionnel au moyen d’une étude transversale auprès de 420 enseignants. L'étude cherche à vérifier la séquence sous-jacente au modèle transactionnel ainsi que divers effets médiateurs/modérateurs issus de l'intervention de certaines caractéristiques individuelles. Les résultats des analyses statistiques permettent globalement de considérer que la perspective transactionnelle est une façon efficace de conceptualiser le stress au travail en milieu scolaire.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".