MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W646712489 · doi:10.24837/pru.2004.2.68

Work-family conflict related to managers in Romania. A correlational study

2004· article· en· W646712489 on OpenAlexaff
Horia Pitariu, Paul E. Spector, Steven Poelmans, Michael P. O'Driscol, Cary L. Cooper, Tammy D. Allen, Laurent Lapierre, Juan I. Sánchez, Adrian H. Pitariu

Bibliographic record

VenuePsihologia Resurselor Umane · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork–family conflictSocial psychologyPsychologyJob satisfactionWork (physics)Family conflictStressorFamily lifeRole conflictRomanianSociologyClinical psychologySocioeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A model of the relationship between work-family and family-work conflict that incorporated variables from work and family demands, organizational and family resources, and some strain variables was tested. This model related bidirectional work-family conflict, work and family demands, resources, and strains. Data came from 327 managers. Results suggested that work-family and family-work conflict is associated with superviser's relationship and organizational constraints. Family requirements are involved in job conflicts. Work load is not considered a stressor and not a conflict producer; it is involved only in some psycho-somatics reactions. Generally speaking, job conflicts are related to job satisfaction, family satisfaction and life satisfaction. All these kinds of satisfation mediated intention to quit. Meanwhile, job conflicts did not generate intention to quit, but are involved in psycho-somatic reactions. We explain many of these conclusions through social-economic transition period in which Romanian society is.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsihologia Resurselor UmaneSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207