MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083823443 · doi:10.5539/ass.v10n12p130

Relationship of Confucian Values to Spiritual Leadership in a South Korean Context

2014· article· en· W2083823443 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
William D. Hunsaker

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorkplace Spirituality and Leadership
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmony (color)Social psychologyEmic and eticPsychologyContext (archaeology)Construct (python library)SociologyGeographyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spiritual leadership is an emerging holistic leadership construct that has been validated in several cultures outside of North America. However, these studies have failed to examine the underlying relationship of embedded cultural values and spiritual leadership. To address this problem, the purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship of Confucian values to spiritual leadership within a South Korean context. Data was gathered through surveys from three firms within Korea’s financial sector. Factor analysis of Confucian values found a two-factor solution, including social order and harmony. Harmony was excluded from analysis due to poor inter-scale correlations. Social order showed a positive, significant relationship to spiritual leadership variables, suggesting Confucian values comprise a portion of the inner life of Koreans and support the emergence of spiritual leadership within a Confucian context. The results of this study increase our understanding of the importance of emic manifestations of leadership theory in generalizing western leadership theories to outside cultures.

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)0.004
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicWorkplace Spirituality and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207