Social Support and Life‐Domain Interactions among Assigned and Self‐Initiated Expatriates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based upon conservation of resources theory, this study is the first to explore (1) the relations between life‐domain support received by internationally mobile employees (IMEs) from their organization, supervisors, coworkers, and family and friends and their life‐domain conflicts and enrichments in two directions: work life → personal life (WL → PL) and personal life → work life (PL → WL) and (2) whether these links are different between assigned expatriates (AEs) and self‐initiated expatriates (SIEs). The questionnaire data were collected from 182 SIEs and 102 AEs. Results from multivariate analyses show that (1) the more IMEs perceive receiving life‐domain support from their family and friends and their organization, the less they report life‐domain conflicts and (2) the more IMEs perceive receiving life‐domain support from their coworkers, the more they report life‐domain enrichments. Finally, it appears that AEs' perceived life‐domain organizational support is positively related to their perceived WL → PL enrichments and that SIEs' perceived life‐domain coworker support is negatively related to their life‐domain conflicts in both directions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".