MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969699419 · doi:10.1108/02683941211252455

Seeking resources: predicting retirees' return to their workplace

2012· article· en· W1969699419 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Managerial Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityValue (mathematics)Resource (disambiguation)Perspective (graphical)Job satisfactionHuman resourcesSample (material)Human resource policiesWork (physics)PsychologyMarketingDemographic economicsBusinessSocial psychologyEconomicsManagementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study aims to employ a resource‐oriented theoretical perspective to examine retirees' desire to return to their former organization. Design/methodology/approach Using a cross‐sectional field study design, data were collected from 243 retirees under 65 years of age who had been retired from a career job less than ten years. Findings Regression results indicate that retirees who had experienced financial and pervasive role loss as well as retirees who perceived a higher fit with their former organization and the availability of desired job role options expressed significantly greater interest in returning. Retirees who experienced gains in leaving work as well as gains in their life satisfaction following retirement reported significantly less interest in returning to their former organization. Research limitations/implications The cross‐sectional design and self‐report data create a potential for bias. Even though the findings are based on respondents' “interest” in returning to their former organization, it is not known if they actually did return. Practical implications Programs should focus on creating an environment that values older workers, and provides them with opportunities such as mentoring other workers. Social implications Policy changes are needed to ensure that returning to work following retirement results in resource gains and not resource losses. Originality/value This study uses resource theory with a diverse sample of retirees and considers their desire to return to their original employers, thus adding value to human resources and management who wish to retain or re‐engage their own knowledgeable retirees.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.267 · 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