MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075915792 · doi:10.1348/096317908x312641

A closer look at the relationship between affective commitment to supervisors and organizations and turnover

2008· article· en· W2075915792 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Vandenberghe, Kathleen Bentein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalHEC Montréal
FundersBritish Psychological SocietyUniversité Catholique de Louvain
KeywordsOrganizational commitmentPsychologyTurnover intentionSocial psychologyAffective events theorySample (material)TurnoverAffect (linguistics)Job performanceJob satisfactionManagementJob attitude

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the relationships of affective organizational commitment and affective commitment to supervisors with turnover intentions and actual turnover, using three independent samples of employees. In Sample 1 ( N =172) and Sample 2 ( N =186), affective organizational commitment and affective commitment to supervisors were found to exert independent negative effects on turnover intentions. Moreover, in both samples, affective commitment to supervisors was more strongly related to turnover intentions when affective organizational commitment was low. In Sample 3 ( N =431), affective commitment to supervisors was the single significant predictor of actual turnover and interacted with affective organizational commitment such that its effect was stronger when affective organizational commitment was low. The implications of these findings for the understanding of the commitment–turnover relationship 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations171
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational and Organizational PsychologySame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207