Effects of work-family and family-work conflict and guilt on job and life satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The boundary between work and family life is now almost invisible, making the search for a balance between both spheres a dilemma and challenge. These concerns have led to a growing increase in studies on work-family and family-work conflict, their predictors, and their effects. This study aims to: 1) observe the predictive effect of work-family conflict (WFC) and family-work conflict (FWC) on work-family guilt (WFG) and family-work guilt (FWG), respectively; and 2) to observe the effect of WFC, FWC, WFG and FWG on satisfaction with life and job satisfaction. In a sample of 213 participants aged between 22 and 64 years (M = 41.77; SD = 6.63), the results show that, in contrast with expectations, WFG and FWG did not prove to be predictors; only WFC and FWC had a negative effect on both guilt and satisfaction with life and job satisfaction. The family work interface is a topic that is extremely important, not only for organizations but also for society. Therefore, the study of its implications on variables is considered essential for the promotion of positive functioning of individuals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".