MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383212616 · doi:10.12712/rpca.v16i4.56442

Examinando a teoria do trabalho como um chamado

2022· article· pt· W4383212616 on OpenAlexaff
Luiz Felipe Magnago Blulm, Adonai José Lacruz

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Pensamento Contemporâneo em Administração · 2022
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicWorkaholism, burnout, and well-being
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutHumanitiesPsychologyClinical psychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O objetivo do estudo é examinar o impacto do chamado ocupacional no desempenho e satisfação no trabalho, Burnout, no Workholism e o papel moderador da religiosidade na relação entre viver um chamado ocupacional e o burnout. A amostra possui 241 respondentes. Foi utilizada a técnica Partial Least Squares Path Modeling (PLS-PM). Os resultados indicam que viver um chamado traz maiores níveis de desempenho e satisfação no trabalho, reduz os níveis de burnout, contrariando o proposto pela WCT, e aumenta o Workaholism. A religiosidade moderou a relação entre viver um chamado ocupacional e os níveis de burnout, enfraquecendo tal relação.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.282 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Pensamento Contemporâneo em AdministraçãoSame topicWorkaholism, burnout, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207