The Relationship between Organizational Trust and Organizational Silence with Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment of the Employees of University
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
<p class="apa">This study aimed to investigate the structural model between organizational trust and organizational silence with job satisfaction and organizational commitment of the employees of Islamic Azad University of Isfahan, Khorasgan branch. The study method is descriptive-correlation. The study population is the employees of Islamic Azad University of Khorasgan branch (Isfahan) as 340. 180 employees are selected by simple random method and sampling Table (Krejcie &amp; Morgan, 1970). The questionnaires of organizational trust (Ellonen et al., 2008) and organizational silence questionnaires, job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Bouradas &amp; Vakola, 2005). For analysis of study findings, Pearson correlation coefficient and structural equations modeling are applied. The results of study showed that organizational trust had inverse and significant relation with organizational silence and had positive and significant relationship with job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Also, there was an inverse and significant relationship between organizational silence and job satisfaction and organizational commitment. The results of structural equations modeling showed that organizational trust had direct impact on organizational silence (-64) organizational commitment (0.45) and job satisfaction (0.39) and has indirect impact via organizational silence on organizational commitment (0.29) and job satisfaction (0.29). Also, organizational silence had direct impact on organizational commitment and job satisfaction (-45). The model has good conditions in terms of fitness indices and fitness data.</p>
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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