The Influence of Personal Values on Feedback‐Seeking Behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the relationship between personal values and feedback‐seeking behaviors. Feedbackseeking behaviors, or the way by which individuals in organizations actively seek information about their performance, has recently become an important research topic in the management literature. However, the large majority of this research has been conducted in the United States. This study aims to test the relationships between the personal values of a multinational sample and feedback‐seeking behaviors. An integrated set of hypotheses regarding the influence of values on feedback seeking are outlined and tested empirically using samples from Canada, China, Mexico, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United States. As predicted, results indicate that significant aspects of feedback seeking were related to personal values. The perceived cost of feedback seeking, the clarity of the feedback from others, and the use of feedback‐seeking behaviors were all linked to personal values. The study also uncovered substantial variations in feedback‐seeking behaviors across nations. The implications of these findings for research on feedback‐seeking behaviors and for feedback practices are discussed.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".