THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN EMPOWERMENT, ORGANIZATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIOURS AND BURNOUT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".