Resilience as Accusation: A Critical Examination of Individual Resilience Training for Burnout Mitigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Burnout, a syndrome of work-related exhaustion and cynicism, is prevalent among nurses and is associated with workplace stressors. Resilience training programs are a prevalent method of burnout mitigation employed by healthcare institutions that aim to improve or alter how individuals respond to chronic stressors. Through the lens of General Systems Theory, we describe resilience training as a method of individualizing a systemic problem by problematizing a response to chronic stress exposure. Resilience training may furthermore serve as a mechanism which allows subversion of institutional responsibility for nurses’ well-being in the workplace. We describe several suggestions for nurses to resist being scapegoated for their responses to systemic problems. Sustainable change must include other disciplines and is likely to require multiple different avenues including individual (e.g., honoring meal breaks), institutional (e.g., increased leadership participation), legislative (e.g., mandatory staffing laws), collective (e.g., collective bargaining), and educational (e.g., emancipatory pedagogy) methods.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".