MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755871509 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v9n10p189

The Impact of Individual Characteristics and Branch Characteristics on Housing Agent Performance: Heckit model and Hierarchical Linear Modeling

2017· article· en· W2755871509 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chun‐Chang Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFacilities and Workplace Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)EstimationMultilevel modelCompensation (psychology)EstateReal estateComputer scienceWork (physics)EconometricsEconomicsPsychologyEngineeringManagementFinanceMachine learningSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the impacts of individual characteristics and branch characteristics on housing agent performance. Data were analyzed using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to provide estimations. The empirical results suggest that individual performance varies significantly from branch to branch and is better in branches with higher levels of compensation for individual performance. Individual characteristics including college level education, having children over the age of six, work experience, the square of work experience, and work experience outside the real estate industry have significant effects on individual performance. Individual performance is also better in branches with requirements for hours worked. The individual performance of salespeople working under team compensation schemes is not significantly better than that of salespeople working in branches without team compensation schemes. When the average housing prices for the areas in which branches operate are higher, individual performance will be higher. As the average housing price for an area increases, however, the corresponding increase in individual performance will be less and less strong. According to the empirical results, there was a degree of self-selection in the samples. The results of two-stage estimation were not significantly different from the estimation results of the original model. Hence, the results demonstrate the robustness of the estimation model used.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicFacilities and Workplace ManagementFrench-language works237,207