MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052760208 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v8n3p67

Assessing the Impact of Emotional Intelligence on Job Satisfaction: An Empirical Study on Faculty Members with Respect to Gender and Age

2015· article· en· W2052760208 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotional intelligencePsychologyJob satisfactionTest (biology)Sample (material)Affect (linguistics)Applied psychologySocial psychologyEmpirical researchStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emotional Intelligence is an important factor for teacher’s success. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of Emotional Intelligence on Job Satisfaction among the academicians in Egyptian higher education institutions. The sample consisted of 100 faculty members from four universities. Various standard statistical tools such as Karl Pearson coefficient of correlation, t-test and regression analysis were used to interpret the data. Findings suggest that Emotional Intelligence did not affect the level of Job Satisfaction. Gender did not have a significant effect on Emotional Intelligence or Job Satisfaction. Older employees had higher levels of Emotional Intelligence; however, age had no effect on reported Job Satisfaction. Gender did not have a moderating effect in Emotional Intelligence-Job Satisfaction relationship. Age had mixed findings. For the younger generation, the relationship was significantly positive. For the older generation, it was insignificant and negative. Results should be approached with caution. Limitations and future research directions are provided in the article.

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 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.518
GPT teacher head0.602
Teacher spread0.083 · 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