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.
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 | 0.037 | 0.092 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".