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
The two purposes of this article were to examine the meta-analytic relationships between several well-studied forms of leadership and employee commitment and to test if some of these relationships vary due to societal culture. Transformational/charismatic leadership was shown to be positively related to affective (AC; ρ = .451, k = 116) and normative commitment (NC; ρ = .337, k = 30), while contingent reward and management-by-exception (active) were positively related to AC (ρ = .369, k = 51 and ρ = .083, k = 25, respectively). Laissez faire leadership was negatively related to AC (ρ = −.296, k = 15). In terms of culture, societal individualism-collectivism did not affect the relationship between transformational/charismatic leadership and AC. In contrast, the relationship between transformational/charismatic leadership and both NC and continuance commitment was stronger in countries that value collectivism. We also found evidence that the relationship between contingent reward and AC was stronger in societies with higher rather than lower levels of power distance/hierarchy. Implications of these findings on the study of leadership, culture, and commitment are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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