Scale Equivalence in Canada and the United States for Interpersonal Conflicts at Work and Individual Resilience in the Construction Sector
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
Interpersonal conflicts at work (ICW) and individual resilience (IR) that describes a person’s positive psychological capacity for performance improvement have the potential to affect construction safety performance. However, few research has been conducted to investigate these two factors on construction sites, e.g., how often ICW occurs on construction sites and whether the occurrence frequency is distributed similarly across countries. It is also necessary to examine whether workers from different countries interpret ICW and IR conceptually similar, which is a precondition for any comparison. By surveying 420 US construction workers and 837 Canadian construction workers, this study conducted measurement equivalence tests and compared the frequency of ICW on the surveyed construction sites. The results show that US and Canadian construction workers interpreted ICW and IR conceptually similar, although with different demographic background. In addition, US respondents reported fewer conflicts with their supervisors, which may be related to the slightly higher age, lower participation in safety committees, and fewer supervisors on site.
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 | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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