Bibliographic record
Abstract
In these times of global unemployment crises, a job is not just a means of survival but a way of living with dignity and honour. However, things turnaround for significant percentage of working population all over the globe and they don’t find in work what they originally joined it for. The workplace gets hostile to them, people behave aggressively, they feel harassment …. They get bullied. In this study we try to show how big a menace the workplace bullying is. We focus on its devastating effects on the lives of people and the organizational culture. By taking suitable examples from various researches, books, magazines, essays, government reports, NGOs and other highly accepted online sources, we try to show how lethal it could be for an organization if it gives in to the disease of workplace bullying. The study suggests some measures about how management can exercise control and ensure the work environment becomes appealing and result in the better productivity and profitability. Our study is driven by the belief that bullying of every kind needs to be stopped at every level and employees be given the relaxed and dignified workplace to work at. This reading should serve as a motivational tool for the organizations where bullying of any sort is prevalent, to check , control and make sure the employees are taking pride in being part of their work culture. Further, the reader shall gain the significant understanding of people involved in this act and effects it may have on the lives of victims and organizational efficiency.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".