Exploring the impact of punishments on employee effort and performance in the workplace: Insights from England's premier league
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
Abstract Despite the prevalence of punishment as a method of enforcing organizational policies, management literature provides little guidance on the impact of punishment on individuals' work performance. A sample of 412 professional soccer players in England's Premier League was utilized to collect unobtrusive, longitudinal data to better understand how individuals react to punishments in their workplace. Our findings indicate that individuals deploy significantly more effort (run more kilometers) following a punishment. However, the findings also indicate that individuals do not perform better following the administration of punishment. In fact, their performance is significantly lower than before the punishment. Although individuals work harder, they actually perform weaker. Further, we found that, when punished more than their team members, individuals deploy significantly more effort than individuals who get punished less than their team members but perform significantly weaker than those 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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