Organizations and Social Worker Well-Being: The Intra-Organizational Context of Practice and Its Impact on a Practitioner's Subjective Well-Being
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to better understand the varied factors that contribute to social worker subjective well-being (SWB) (the social science concept for happiness). Using qualitative methods of inquiry 19 social workers who reported having low to medium levels of workplace and profession satisfaction were interviewed to assess those factors within their lives that they perceived as impacting their well-being. One thematic category from the analysis was aspects of the intraorganizational context of workplaces that can impact social worker SWB. Respondents identified interpersonal workplace relationships, decision-making processes, management/supervisory dynamics, workload and workplace expectations, access to resources and infrastructure support, and inter-organizational relationships as key intra-organizational factors contributing to their overall wellbeing. In conclusion, these findings have practical application within organizations for structured policies and unstructured practices to improve social worker subjective well-being.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it