MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344398625 · doi:10.1177/0149206316645653

Using Bifactor Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling to Test for a Continuum Structure of Motivation

2016· article· en· W2344398625 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Joshua L. Howard, Marylène Gagné, Alexandre J. S. Morin, Jacques Forest

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersAustralian Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaFonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et Culture
KeywordsStructural equation modelingVariance (accounting)PsychologyAutonomyExploratory factor analysisConfirmatory factor analysisExplained variationSocial psychologyEconometricsMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the nature of workplace motivation by testing the continuum structure of motivation proposed by self-determination theory through the application of relatively new and advanced methodological techniques. Specifically, we demonstrate the usefulness of the overarching bifactor exploratory structural equation modeling framework in organizational psychology and discuss implications of such models over more traditional confirmatory factor analyses. This framework is applied to responses obtained from 1,124 Canadian employees who completed a multidimensional measure of workplace motivation. The results support a continuum of self-regulation and illustrate the importance of accounting for quality of motivation in addition to its global quantity. Indeed, the results showed that specific types of motivation explained variance in covariates over and above the variance already explained by the global quantity of self-determination. The current study further demonstrates the limitation of the commonly used relative autonomy index and offers alternate conceptualizations of human motivation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.066
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.066
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations248
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ManagementSame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207