MODERATING EFFECT OF SELF-EFFICACY AND IMPACT OF CAREER DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES ON CAREER SUCCESS UNDER THE MEDIATING ROLE OF CAREER COMMITMENT IN THE INSURANCE SECTOR OF PAKISTAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research paper is to explore the mediating role of career commitment and moderating effect of self-efficacy between career development practices and career success of employee in insurance sector of Pakistan. Survey method was adopted to collect the data form 374 employees working in insurance sector systematic sampling. PLS-SEM technique was used using Smart PLS 2.0 to analyze data. Findings of this study suggest that employees’ career development practices have positive relationship with career commitment and career success and how self-efficacy effects the career success. Self-efficacy is the beliefs of employees about career success in insurance sector. Finally, career commitment mediates the positive role between career development practices and self-efficacy moderates the career success of insurance sector employees. The effect of career development practices on career commitment and effect of career development practices on career success has been checked in past studies but the mediating role of career commitment and moderating effect of self-efficacy particularly for the employees of insurance sector has not been checked before.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".