The Moral Impacts of Organizational Stress on Correctional Officers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organizational stress (i.e., structural aspects of the organization such as excessive workload, shiftwork, gossip) has long been found by public safety personnel to be more impactful on their health and wellness than operational stress (i.e., inherent stresses of the job such as altercations, intervention in suicide behaviors). In the current study, which engages semi-structured interviews conducted with 28 correctional officers employed at one provincial prison in Atlantic Canada, we unpack through a lens of moral distress four prevalent sources of organizational stress among correctional officers that emerged in the data without categories precogitated, with a focus on participant experiences and expressed similarities across accounts: (1) management, (2) staff retention, (3) training needs, (4) lack of mental health support. Findings indicate organizational stress has a significant impact on correctional officers and these sources of organizational stress are exacerbated by officers’ moral and ethical vulnerabilities emergent from their conditions of employment. We recommend several practical changes to ease the strains and moral harms felt by correctional officers and better support their mental health and well-being, such as increasing staffing levels, providing more education and training opportunities for frontline officers and senior leaders, and providing more adequate mental health support for correctional officers.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".