Development of the Workplace Health Promotion Perception Scale
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we developed a scale to assess employee perceptions of the presence of workplace health promotion (WHP) programs within their organizational environment. After reviewing the literature and following the social-ecological model of health, 14 scale items were generated and initially tested with university staff and students. From these analyses and feedback from reviewers, six items were removed. The remaining eight items were completed by an independent sample of employees in various companies. A two-factor model fit the data well, assessing the perceived support provided by the organization, such as financial support for health improvements at work, and the strategic approach of the organization in addressing workplace health, such as holding meetings and training about improving health. The sub-scales and total score were found to be internally consistent/reliable (α = 0.85 and 0.79, respectively), and correlated significantly with a work performance measure in one of the samples. The new Workplace Health Promotion Perception (WHPP) scale demonstrates initially sound measurement properties for use in organizations, although further research is suggested, and examples provided.
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.
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 | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it