MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038912533 · doi:10.1177/147059580223002

Predicting Expatriate Work Attitudes

2002· article· en· W2038912533 on OpenAlexaff
Chantell E. Nicholls, Mitchell G. Rothstein, Andrea Bourne

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cross Cultural Management · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Student and Expatriate Challenges
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpatriatePsychologySocial psychologyTraitAmbiguityPersonalitySet (abstract data type)Sample (material)Closure (psychology)CognitionWork (physics)Job satisfactionBig Five personality traitsApplied psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taking an individual difference perspective, we evaluated individual trait and skill antecedents to expatriate attitudes and turnover intent with a sample of 84 expatriates working in China. We investigated the role of a theoretically relevant personality trait - cognitive closure - reflecting comfort with ambiguity and uncertainty, and we introduced a set of empirically derived skill-based adjustment competencies developed through a job analytical technique. The results showed that work-related adjustment competencies, and in particular the ability to integrate head and host offices, were important to positive work attitudes and intention to remain on assignment. These results underscore the importance of selecting and training expatriates on adjustment competencies specific to cross cultural work to reduce the costs of assignment failure. Cognitive closure related to non-work related adjustment competencies (cultural sensitivity and ability to adapt to the social environment), suggesting that this trait may be related to non-work related aspects of expatriate attitudes and 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Cross Cultural ManagementSame topicInternational Student and Expatriate ChallengesFrench-language works237,207