Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Who becomes a leader is of considerable importance to employees, organizations and society. Recently, researchers have considered whether early life events outside of the workplace affect who occupies leadership roles within organizations. Informed by the lifespan approach to leadership, and the work–home resources model, we investigate whether violence in adolescent dating relationships is associated with leader role occupancy in adulthood. We hypothesize that experiencing psychological aggression and physical violence indirectly lowers the likelihood of occupying a leadership role through depressive symptoms. Moreover, we hypothesize that the indirect effects will be weaker when parent–adolescent relationship quality is higher, when adolescents come from higher household incomes, and stronger for women. Drawing on four waves of ADD Health, results showed that experiencing early psychological aggression in dating relationships increased depressive symptoms, hindering leader role occupancy; however, this effect was buffered by income, and stronger for women. Experiencing physical violence exerted indirect negative effects on leader role occupancy via depressive symptoms, regardless of parent–adolescent relationship quality, income or gender. There were no direct effects of aggression or violence on leader role occupancy. Our findings suggest that early personal relationships can impact young adult's mental health, which in turn can influence leadership outcomes into adulthood.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".