Examination of deep acting in retail disability service training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The quality of retail service delivered to disabled customers is affected by employees’ behaviour and attitudes. These behaviours are related to employees’ ability to manage their emotional reactions (referred to as emotional labour) to disabled customers’ varied and personalized needs. Although retailers provide disability training, employees utilize varied levels of emotional labour skills (referred to as deep acting) in interactions with disabled customers. Studies call on employers to improve disability training for employees, so that they can manage their emotional labour and disabled customers can receive higher quality service. This study addresses the question of whether training activities influence retail employees’ deep acting skills at various levels when providing services to disabled customers. By adapting Brotheridge & Lee's (2003) Emotional Labor Scale and Saks and Belcourt's (2006) Training Activities Scale, 150 participants filled a questionnaire and were grouped into three categorical levels based on their deep acting skills prior to training. The results show a positive influence exists between activities during and after training and deep acting skill levels. This study calls on retail organizations to identify employees with positive refocus and basic levels of deep acting and invest more in during and after training stages to facilitate the transfer of deep acting skills.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".