La vigencia del contrato psicológico: Aproximaciones teóricas y empíricas desde las Américas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The continuous changes that characterize the world of work and labor relations today change in various ways the perceptions, expectations and beliefs of workers and employers regarding the content and fulfillment of their commercial relations. Thus, these perceptions, expectations and beliefs configure psychological contracts which define the framework of the interactions between individuals and organizational agents and influence their attitudes, behaviors and decisions as well. That’s why the psychological contract constitutes a fundamental element for understanding the psychosocial processes involved in labor relations. This book aims to offer an overview of the diversity that characterizes the conceptual reflection and research on the psychological contract carried out from various countries in the Americas. Researchers from Colombia, Puerto Rico, Mexico, Brazil, Canada and Spain present a set of theoretical and empirical works that seek to deepen the understanding of employee-organization relations in the multiple labor contexts of their countries. Summarizing, this book offers for the first time a broad, though not exhaustive, overview of psychological contract research in a selection of Spanish, English, and Portuguese-speaking American countries in the south, center, and north of the continent, also represents a valuable contribution to research in organizational and work psychology in those contexts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".