The double-edged sword of manager caring behavior: Implications for employee wellbeing.
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
While managers play a critical role in supporting employee wellbeing, prior research suggests that doing so can take a toll on managers themselves. However, we know little about the potential implications of this for employees. Drawing from the leadership-wellbeing literature and social psychological theories of guilt, we propose that manager caring behavior is associated with both positive (vitality) and negative (guilt) employee wellbeing. We find support for these relationships in Study 1 (N = 264) with a time-separated survey. In Study 2, we replicate these findings, and in addition, we examine a negative perceptual response to manager care: employee-rated manager role overload. Drawing on perceptual salience research, we propose that the negative relationship between manager care and employee-rated manager role overload is exacerbated in a team environment where employees fail to care for each other (i.e., a weak caring climate). Study 2 (N = 360) largely supports our hypotheses with multilevel, time-separated field data. The findings suggest that managers should not be expected to "go it alone" to support employee wellbeing because doing so may relate negatively to employee outcomes. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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