MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993379142 · doi:10.1080/01621424.2012.681526

The Influence of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Job Values on Turnover Intention Among Continuing Care Assistants in Nova Scotia

2012· article· en· W1993379142 on OpenAlexaffabout
Donna Dill, Janice Keefe, Daniel S. McGrath

Bibliographic record

VenueHome Health Care Services Quarterly · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent UniversityNova Scotia Department of Health and WellnessDalhousie UniversityNova Scotia Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaTurnoverFlexibility (engineering)Turnover intentionPsychologyLogistic regressionJob satisfactionDemographicsWork (physics)Social psychologyDemographic economicsMedicineDemographyStatisticsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the influence that intrinsic and extrinsic job values have on the turnover intention of continuing care assistants (CCAs) who work either in home care or facility-based care in Nova Scotia (n = 188). Factor analysis of job values identified three latent job values structures: "compensation and commitment," "flexibility and opportunity," and "positive work relationships." Using binary logistic regression, we examined the predictive utility of these factors on two indices of turnover intention. Regression results indicate that, in general, job values constructs did not significantly predict turnover intention when controlling for demographics and job characteristics. However, a trend was found for the "positive work relationships" factor in predicting consideration of changing employers. In addition, CCAs who work in facility-based care were significantly more likely to have considered leaving their current employer. With projected increases in the demand for these workers in both home and continuing care, more attention is needed to identify and address factors to reduce turnover intention.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHome Health Care Services QuarterlySame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207