La duplicité induite par l’organisation : une exploration de ses effets sur la satisfaction envers les tâches, l’employeur et la profession
Bibliographic record
Abstract
User de duplicité ou de mensonge pour atteindre des objectifs à court terme serait un comportement fréquent dans le commerce de la vente au détail. S’inspirant des principes de la confusopoly, l’objectif de cette étude est d’explorer les effets de la duplicité induite par l’organisation (DIO) sur différents types de satisfaction. Cent quatre-vingt-huit (188) représentants aux ventes oeuvrant dans les boutiques de grands fournisseurs du secteur des télécommunications canadiennes ont complété un sondage électronique. Les résultats obtenus montrent l’apport du concept de la DIO sur différents types de satisfaction et reconnaissent l’apport incrémental de la DIO, et donc au-delà les effets d’autres facteurs (i.e. le stress au travail, des attentes claires de la part du supérieur immédiat et un accès à de la formation).
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".