Organizational Citizenship Behavior among Local Government Employees in East Coast Malaysia: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A pilot test was carried out to determine the suitability, validity and reliability of a survey instrument in preparation for a large scale study to be undertaken involving one of the important public sector namely local governments. Content and face validity was initially carried out through a panel of expert where some modification and alteration to the original set was made taking into account that local governments’ employees are majority Malays with basic tertiary education level and are support staff category (low to middle level management staff). Data obtained from pilot testing was analyzed where the values of Cronbach’s alpha for all variables exceeded the 0.6 benchmark, an indication that the reliability of the scale instrument was reliable. Normality tests indicated that the data was normally distributed and the assumptions of linearity and homocedasticity in the multivariate analyses have been fulfilled. Demographic profile and descriptive statistics of the respondents were tabled out and analyzed. It is envisaged that the measurement tool will contribute in elevating organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) level among local governments’ employees as OCB has been identified as a vehicle to promote overall organizational effectiveness at a relatively low cost.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".