MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033673060

THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN EMPOWERMENT, ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOURS AND BURNOUT

2009· article· en· W7033673060 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRural and Ethnic Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutCynicismVariance (accounting)Multilevel modelOrganizational citizenship behaviorEmpowermentSample (material)Test (biology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to examine structural empowerment and burnout as correlates of organizational citizenship behaviours directed at the organization (OCBO) and peers (OCBI) using Kanter’s (1977, 1979) structural empowerment theory. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were employed to test the hypothesized relationships. The final sample included 897 participants from five hospitals in Ontario and Nova Scotia who returned surveys. The regression model predicting OCBI accounted for 5.4% of the variance {F=l .444, p < .001), with efficacy (P=.253,/? < .001) as the only significant predictor. The model predicting OCBO accounted for 15.5% of the variance (F= 23.91,p < .001) with age (P = .147,/? < .001), empowerment (p = .119,/? < .001), cynicism (P = -.114,/? < .01), and efficacy (P = .244,/? < .001) as significant predictors. These results link Kanter’s (1977,1979) empowerment theory to burnout and OCB.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.231 · 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