MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522056898 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v8n10p176

The Influence of Leadership Styles and Motivation of Employees Job Satisfaction

2016· article· en· W2522056898 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmployee Performance and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob satisfactionPsychologyTest (biology)Normality testLeadership styleRegression analysisSocial psychologyVariablesApplied psychologyStatisticsStatistical hypothesis testingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The purpose of this research is to know and test whether there is influence of the style of leadership to the job satisfaction of employees, whether there is influence the motivation of the employees’ job satisfaction and whether there is influence of the style of leadership and motivation of the job satisfaction of employees at PT. Garuda Milky Artha Surabaya.</p><p>This type of research used in this research is descriptive. This research uses random sampling for the sampling, and questionnaire used to retrieve the data from this study. Data analysis techniques of this study is to test the validity, reliability test, normality test, regression deviation, analysis of data using linear regression, and test hypotheses.</p><p>The results of this research are variable and variable leadership motivation apparently is affecting employee job satisfaction.</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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.236 · 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