Creativity Under Stress at Work: A Person-Centered Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Work exposes people to different kinds of stressors and provides different resources. Building on the job demands-resources theory (JD-R), the current study examined intrapersonal patterns of job stressors (challenge and hindrance demands) and personal and job resources (i.e. passion and voice) and their relationship with creativity outcomes (creative self-efficacy and creative behavior) in a sample of hospital workers (N = 5,066). Latent profile analyses identified five groups with distinct patterns of job demands and resources, in which stress-related demands were paired with either high or low resources. The creativity-related outcomes were similarly high in Low Stressor Demands-Moderate Resources and High Stressor Demands-Moderate Resources groups, suggesting that resources play an important role in creativity when stress-related demands are high. This research highlights the benefits of using a person-centered approach for developing a better understanding of how stress-related demands interact with resources within individuals.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it