MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362690280 · doi:10.55365/1923.x2023.21.43

The Psychological State that Workers are Exposed to During Work Pressure and its Relationship to the Efficiency and Quality of Outputs

2023· article· en· W4362690280 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Majid Khalaf Alshammari, Mohamad Hashim Othman, Yasmin Othman Mydin, Badiea Abdulkarem Mohammed

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economics and Finance · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStressorWorkloadWork (physics)Affect (linguistics)Quality (philosophy)Occupational stressPsychologySet (abstract data type)Social psychologyMental healthStress (linguistics)Applied psychologyRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessComputer scienceClinical psychologyEconomicsManagementEngineeringPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The workplace can either affect the employees positively or negatively. Work can cause pressure and lead to stress which is not good for the employees. Occupational stress can be defined as a physiological and psychological that occurs due to pressure inflicted at the work place to achieve set goals and objectives when the individual's work ability and the work requirement is not equal. Stress can define a negative condition or a positive condition that responds to a stressor and that can have an impact on a person's mental or physical health and wellbeing. The causes of work place stress include tight deadlines, pressure from the management, too much workload and conflict of interest .The impact of work place include poor quality output and reduced efficiency of getting the work done.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economics and FinanceSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ManagementFrench-language works237,207