How You Treat Me Matters: The Role of Incivility Behaviours in Close Relationships Formed Between Individuals in Virtual Work
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the current study is to understand the impact of civility and incivility in virtual work between management and staff, and its effects on employee outcomes (e.g., burnout, workplace anxiety). To test the hypotheses that incivility will lead to higher job burnout and workplace anxiety between employees and their management, an online survey was distributed to virtually working employees across Canada. Participants were recruited based on an applied sample and asked to respond to the material. Responses from participants were analyzed using a correlational analysis. The results showed that although incivility does lead to job burnout and workplace anxiety in virtual, the prediction that these experiences would be more frequent was not supported. These results suggest that incivility may not be as present in virtual work as originally anticipated. In order to develop more understanding of virtual work in the future, it is imperative to develop institutional and interpersonal recommendations that maintain supportive, psychologically safe, and respectful dynamics between management and their staff.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".