Stressors percieved as important by department chairs
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
The role of the department chairs is essential in higher education. Hence, determining the sources of their stressors as well as clarifying the ways these stressors impact their lives could be helpful in identifying solutions that make chairs more efficient both personally and professionally. A three-stage Delphi methodology was used for this study to explore the top stressors that department chairs (4 women, 16 men) across different disciplines at one Canadian university experience and the ways these stressors influence their personal and professional lives. The findings of the study revealed 18 categories of stressors. Among all these categories, the five with the highest level of agreement between department chairs were examined in detail. The top five stressors were: "Personal time for research", "Deadlines", "Task demands", "Time pressure", and "Centralization". These stressors were found to impact the chairs' personal and professional lives adversely. Awareness about stress factors that decrease the efficiency of chairs at work and their satisfaction at home can inform the planning and implementation of initiatives to counter the negative influence of the stressors on department chairs and the whole university as a system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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