The Three‐Component Model of Organisational Commitment: An Application to South Korea
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted two studies to determine whether the three‐component model of organisational commitment (Meyer & Allen, 1991) is generalisable to a non‐Western culture using data from South Korea. In Study 1, we found that when the 6‐item versions of the scales (Meyer, Allen, & Smith, 1993) were translated into Korean, the psychometric properties of the Affective Commitment Scale were similar to those found in North America, but problems were identified in the Continuance and Normative Commitment Scales. In Study 2, we found that these problems could be overcome by adopting a revised set of items written in North America. The new scales demonstrated good psychometric properties in terms of factorial validity, internal consistency, and criterion‐related validity with respect to turnover intention. We concluded that the three commitment constructs are likely to generalise to non‐Western cultures, but that there might be a need to refine the measures for cross‐cultural research.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it