MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976756735 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n13p22

Key Predictors of Employee Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior

2014· article· en· W1976756735 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Estrella Verónica, R. Indradevi

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganizational citizenship behaviorOrganizational commitmentEmployee researchAffective events theoryPsychologyCitizenshipHoly GrailPublic relationsKey (lock)PerceptionBusinessSocial psychologyJob performancePolitical scienceJob satisfaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Employee Commitment is the bondage an employee possesses towards his organization. Building Employee Commitment (EC) to the work place is the need of the hour for all the organizations. Nowadays no organization can execute at high level unless otherwise employees are committed to the organizations goals. Commitment could be described as the Holy Grail of organizational performance and business psychology. Hence, it is significant to recognize the concept of commitment and its feasible outcomes. Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) is assumed as one of the rising management perception of managerial efficacy. This study intends to focus on key predictors of employee commitment and organizational citizenship behavior. A quantitative research is employed to explore the predictors of EC and OCB. The study identified six factors that predicted employee commitment and five factors that predicted organizational citizenship behavior.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207