MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404898638 · doi:10.31211/rpics.2024.10.2.345

Demandas e recursos de tecnologias de informação e comunicação: evidências de validade de um instrumento

2024· article· pt· W4404898638 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Sandra Carlotto, Sheila Gonçalves Câmara, Lia Severo Vieira, Guilherme Welter Wendt, Arla Day

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Portuguesa de Investigação Comportamental e Social · 2024
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicTechnology Adoption and User Behaviour
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contexto: O modelo Demandas-Recursos em Tecnologias de Informação e Comunicação (TIC) propõe que a tecnologia pode atuar como recurso facilitador ou demanda adicional, influenciando o estresse e saúde ocupacional. Objetivo: Adaptar e validar as Escalas sobre Demandas e Recursos de TIC para o contexto brasileiro, explorando suas propriedades psicométricas. Métodos: Participaram 213 trabalhadores brasileiros que utilizavam TIC no desempenho laboral, a maioria do sexo masculino (64,8%) com média de idade de 35,5 anos e formação superior (92,5%). O instrumento foi administrado online, e os dados foram analisados através de Análise Fatorial Confirmatória (AFC) e coeficiente de fidedignidade Ômega. Resultados: A AFC revelou uma estrutura idêntica à original, com oito fatores para a escala de Demandas e dois para a escala de Recursos, ambos com coeficientes Ômega satisfatórios e índices de ajuste adequados. Conclusão: O instrumento apresenta validade psicométrica adequada para investigar demandas e recursos em ambientes de trabalho com TIC, oferecendo uma ferramenta útil para gestores que busquem avaliar e equilibrar esses aspectos no contexto laboral, prevenindo o estresse ocupacional.

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.211
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.211
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.010
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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 venueRevista Portuguesa de Investigação Comportamental e SocialSame topicTechnology Adoption and User BehaviourFrench-language works237,207