Can “Temps” Secure Future Employment? Investigating the Relationship Between Proactive Behaviors and Employers’ Rehiring Decision
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
This study examines how the adoption of proactive socialization behaviors by temporary agency workers is related to contract renewal intention of the supervisor in the client organization in which they are assigned. We propose that the adoption of such behaviors will be associated with a favorable performance evaluation from the supervisor in the client organization, and in turn, to his or her contract renewal intention through two mechanisms, namely, role clarity and leader–member exchange (LMX), which refers to the quality of the relationship between the temporary worker and his or her supervisor. Data were collected from 217 worker–supervisor dyads. Results indicate that information-seeking behavior is related to performance evaluation through role clarity. This indirect relationship is however negative, as greater role clarity relates negatively to performance evaluation. Our results also show that LMX acts as a mediator between feedback seeking, boss-relationship building, and performance. Finally, favorable performance evaluation is positively associated with contract renewal intention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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