MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Workplace Aggression

2004· article· en· W4246758698 on OpenAlexaff
Manon Mireille LeBlanc, Julian Barling

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Directions in Psychological Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorkplace Violence and Bullying
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAggressionPsychologyInsiderSocial psychologyInjusticeAnger

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vast majority of workplace aggression is perpetrated by members of the public, or organizational outsiders. Organizational employees (i.e., insiders) seldom kill or physically assault their colleagues. The most frequent manifestations of insider-initiated aggression involve less dramatic acts, such as shouting at and spreading rumors about colleagues. Both individual (e.g., alcohol consumption, hostile attributional bias) and organizational (e.g., overcontrolling supervision, perceived injustice) factors predict which individuals are most likely to engage in insider aggression. Research has shown that victims of insider-initiated aggression experience negative personal (e.g., emotional well-being and physical health) and organizational (e.g., work attitudes) outcomes. Despite increasing research on workplace aggression, significant gaps in our knowledge remain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.394 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Directions in Psychological ScienceSame topicWorkplace Violence and BullyingFrench-language works237,207