Effects of Individual and Work Environment Characteristics on Training Effectiveness: Evidence from Skill Certification System for Automotive Industry in Thailand
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
Previous research over the past two decades has argued Kirkpatrick’s model ignored the work environment and individual factors influencing training effectiveness. A focus of this study is to investigate four levels of Kirkpatrick’s model with a focus on moderating the influences of individual and work environment characteristic variables, which are learning motivation, self-efficacy, motivation to transfer, and social support. In the present study, we used path analysis to test the hypotheses. The results of this study expand our understanding of the progressive causal relationship of reaction, learning, and behavior to results. In particular, this study confirms the influence of the individual and work environment characteristic on training outcomes and it has implications for enhancing training effectiveness. Although the result of motivation to transfer as a moderating variable has negative effects on the relationship between learning and behavior, social support directly affects behavior change after training and moderates the relationship between learning and behavior. Furthermore, future research on training evaluation should consider the training design variables beyond the training course that may have interfered with the training outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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.
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