MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385295722 · doi:10.1002/smi.3298

Leaders’ emotional labour and abusive supervision: The moderating role of mindfulness

2023· article· en· W4385295722 on OpenAlexafffund
Mikaila Ortynsky, Megan M. Walsh, Erica Carleton, Julie Ziemer

Bibliographic record

VenueStress and Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmotional Labor in Professions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaSaint Mary's UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAbusive supervisionMindfulnessPsychologyModerated mediationSocial psychologyEmotional laborMediationTraitEmotional exhaustionSelf-controlBurnoutPsychotherapistClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we examine how leaders' emotional labour strategies (surface acting and deep acting) deplete leaders' self-control resources to predict abusive supervision, in addition to the moderating role of leader mindfulness. Integrating ego-depletion theory and emotion regulation theory, we hypothesise that deep acting and surface acting predict higher levels of abusive supervision, which is mediated by reduced self-control. Furthermore, we predict that leaders' trait mindfulness moderates the relationship between emotional labour and self-control on abusive supervision. Results from a three-wave study of leader-follower dyads supported mediation hypotheses; both deep and surface acting predicted abusive supervision, which is mediated by reduced self-control. Our moderated mediation hypotheses were supported for deep acting but not surface acting. This research contributes to the literature by demonstrating the depleting nature of emotional labour in leadership and the importance of leader mindfulness as a boundary condition that can make deep acting less harmful for leader behaviour.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStress and HealthSame topicEmotional Labor in ProfessionsFrench-language works237,207