Job satisfaction in Cascadia: A comparison of British Columbia, Oregon, and Washington civil servants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada and the USA share a common cultural source in the British Empire, yet within shared democratic traditions, very different political structures, policy processes, and values have been identified. Canada is seen as having a more deferential culture more supportive of government while Americans have been argued to be more individualistic and cynical about the role of government in society. Using a political culture framework, this study examines the degree to which Canadian and U.S. civil servants perceive societal respect for their public sector jobs, and the impact of those perceptions on individual job satisfaction. It is argued that if civil servants feel more valued by society, they are more likely to have higher levels of public service motivation, which then contributes to higher levels of individual job satisfaction. This study employs surveys of Oregon, Washington and British Columbian civil servants conducted in 2011 and 2012 to investigate this relationship. Findings suggest that British Columbian civil servants feel more valued by society when compared to Oregon and Washington civil servants, and these perceptions of positive societal support are associated with higher levels of individual job satisfaction.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".