Training Engagement Theory: A Multilevel Perspective on the Effectiveness of Work-Related Training
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
Training engagement theory provides a multilevel depiction of the antecedents of training effectiveness. By multilevel, we are referring both to the hierarchical nature of constructs—such that employees are embedded in organizations and workgroups—and the temporal nature of processes—emphasizing that macro and within-person processes are not static phenomena. The hierarchical nature of training engagement theory provides a broad account of how processes at various levels in the organizational hierarchy influence one another and contribute to the success or failure of training programs. The temporal nature of the theory advocates for examining the processes that occur from before training is conceptualized until the completion of training when examining the antecedents of training effectiveness. Thus, training engagement theory proposes a sequence model of the independent and joint effects of establishing training goals, prioritizing those goals, and persisting during goal striving on training effectiveness. Finally, we propose testable multilevel propositions to spur future research.
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 | 0.015 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it