An Empirical Study on Public Service Motivation and the Performance of Government Employee in China UNE ÉTUDE EMPIRIQUE SUR LA MOTIVATION DU SERVICE PUBLIQUE ET LA PERFORMANCE DES EMPLOYÉS DU GOUVERNEMENT EN CHINE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perry and Wise (1990) summarized the potential behavioral implications of PSM. Then more researches tried to explore and test the propositions suggested by them. Inspired by these researches, a research was conducted to elaborate the relationship between PSM and government employee’s performance by empirical data collected in Chinese government agencies. The study offered the evidence that the levels of PSM of government employees and their job satisfaction were the efficient predictors of their performance. PSM can explain more variance of performance than job satisfaction. But organizational commitment is not. There is no relationship between continuance commitment and PSM as well as performance. The indirect effects of organizational commitment on performance are achieved by job satisfaction. Key words: public service motivation, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, performance Resume: Perry et Wise (1990) ont recapitule les implications comportementales potentielles du PSM. Alors on a entrepris beaucoup de recherches pour explorer et examiner les propositions suggerees par elles. Inspire par ces recherches, une etude a ete conduite pour etablir le rapport entre le PSM et la performance des employes du gouvernement par des donnees empiriques rassemblees dans les organismes gouvernementaux chinois. L'etude demontre que les niveaux de PSM des employes du gouvernement et leur satisfaction professionnelle etaient les facteurs predictifs efficaces de leur performance. Le PSM peut expliquer plus le desaccord de performance que la satisfaction professionnelle. Mais c’est n’est pas le cas de l'engagement organisationnel. Il n'y a aucun rapport entre l'engagement de continuation et le PSM ainsi que la performance. Les effets indirects de l'engagement d'organisation sur la performance sont realises par la satisfaction professionnelle. Mots-Cles: motivation du service public, satisfaction professionnelle, engagement organisationnel, performance
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".