MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093661651 · doi:10.1177/0022185613498659

Voice within trade unions? A test of the voice and loyalty hypothesis

2013· article· en· W2093661651 on OpenAlexaff
Donna Maree Buttigieg, Stephen Deery, Roderick D. Iverson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Industrial Relations · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltyTest (biology)Trade unionEmployee voicePsychologyAggressionPanel dataS VoiceSocial psychologyBusinessEconomicsInternational tradeMarketingComputer scienceEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frustration–aggression theories, such as exit–voice and loyalty, have been tested using agents as voice but have not been examined with unions as the organization in question. Utilizing longitudinal panel data ( n = 874), this article tests this theory with regard to voice within a trade union. This study does not find support for the exit–voice model; instead, it provides support for cost–benefit and interactionist theories. Further, the study finds that members with high union satisfaction are more likely to express voice when they perceive their leaders to be highly responsive to their needs and concerns.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Industrial RelationsSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207