MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120824954 · doi:10.1177/002194360304000404

The Impact of Benefits on Graduating Student Willingness to Accept Job Offers

2003· article· en· W2120824954 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business Communication · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployer Branding and e-HRM
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWillingness to acceptQuality (philosophy)Sample (material)PsychologyValue (mathematics)Process (computing)Social psychologyPublic relationsWillingness to payMarketingBusinessEconomicsPolitical scienceComputer scienceMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research presented in this article evaluates the influence of qual ity of information communicated about both non-traditional and tra ditional benefits on the recruitment of college graduates. Using a sample of students who were about to engage in the job search process, we varied the quality of information describing benefits and examined how communicating different degrees of information influenced will ingness to accept a job. Increasing the quality of information commu nicated about traditional decreased the willingness to accept job offers. However, increasing the quality of communication about non-tradi tional benefits increased respondents' perceived value of those benefits in making job choices. The results partially support the metamyth of communication.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.260 · 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