MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392057851 · doi:10.1080/15401383.2024.2319829

An Experimental Examination of the Effectiveness of Animal Assisted Activities for Employee Stress Indicators Improvement in Mexican Organization

2024· article· en· W4392057851 on OpenAlexaff
Liudmila Jdanova, Elide Carmona

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Creativity in Mental Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsAdlerKwantlen Polytechnic University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPsychological interventionSadnessAngerHappinessContext (archaeology)AnxietyStress managementIntervention (counseling)MoodApplied psychologyClinical psychologyStress (linguistics)Job stressSocial psychologyJob satisfactionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 21st century, workplace stress is considered globally prevalent and costly to organizations and societies. There is a need for effective and practical interventions to reduce employee stress. This study examines the impact of Animal Assisted Activities (AAA) intervention on employee stress and mood levels in Mexican organizations. Results of an experimental mixed-methods design (3 × 2) study showed that the participants who interacted with the dogs reported a decrease and the lowest levels of stress, anxiety, anger, and sadness, as well as an increase and the highest levels of happiness in comparison to the participants in social gathering and control conditions after the intervention. This study provides empirical evidence for generalizing the use of therapy dogs to the Mexican work context as a viable and effective intervention to facilitate employee wellbeing.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.372 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Creativity in Mental HealthSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207