Casting a Wider Net: An Examination of the Widespread Effects of Occupational Injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although research has explored workplace injuries, injuries tend to be examined from a binary perspective, and the broad ramifications of workplace injuries have yet to be fully explored.In this research, I conduct two studies that extend current knowledge on the outcomes of workplace injuries.Study 1 examines the effects of occupational injuries among injured individuals.Analyses suggest the nature of the occupational injury affects health, stress, and positive and negative work beliefs.Study 2 examines the effects of workplace injuries on romantic partners of injured individuals.Analyses suggest that health, objective burden, relationship satisfaction, and relationship quality of romantic partners are influenced by their partners' occupational injury.In both studies, mediating and moderating relationships are explored.Overall, these findings suggest the nature of the injury matters, and effects of workplace injuries are more widespread than typically addressed.These findings have important implications for research and practice.Keywords: occupational injuries, romantic partners, work-life/family interface comments in the development of this thesis.Her helpful directions were indispensable.Further, I would like to thank Dr. Greg Sears
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 | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".