Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’objectif principal de ce mémoire est d’identifier les antécédents organisationnels de la supervision abusive. Alors, un modèle intégrant la culture organisationnelle a été élaboré. Les données primaires recueillies par l’Équipe de Recherche sur le Travail et la Santé Mentale (l’ERTSM) auprès de 2162 employés de 63 établissements au Québec de septembre 2009 à mai 2012 ont permis de tester nos hypothèses. Les analyses multiniveaux réalisées corroborent une relation significative entre la culture organisationnelle et la supervision abusive. Les résultats ont montré que la culture de performance est positivement reliée à la supervision abusive contrairement à la culture de relations sociales. Aussi, ces analyses révèlent que certains subordonnés seraient plus enclins à rapporter de la supervision abusive que d´autres. Enfin, d’autres caractéristiques organisationnelles comme la taille de l’établissement pourraient être associées à la supervision abusive.
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 | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".