MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790265731 · doi:10.1002/cjas.1481

The Doctrine of the Mean: Workplace Relationships and Turnover Intention

2018· article· en· W2790265731 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fong‐Yi Lai, Szu‐Chi Lu, Cheng‐Chen Lin, Yu‐Chin Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurnover intentionPsychologyRegression analysisSocial psychologyTurnoverSample (material)Congruence (geometry)Organizational commitmentManagementStatisticsChemistryMathematicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The present study examines the curvilinear relationships between LMX/TMX and team members' turnover intention simultaneously. That is, members with high LMX, TMX, or both are more likely to have turnover intention. Hypotheses were tested with a sample of 452 nurses, and we adopted the response surface methodology and polynomial regression to test our theoretical model. The hierarchical regression analysis showed that TMX has a U‐shaped relationship with turnover intention but not with LMX. In addition, the results indicate that both the congruence and incongruence of LMX and TMX result in higher turnover intention, but moderate levels of LMX and TMX have the lowest turnover intention. Strengths, limitations, practical implications, and directions for future research are discussed. Copyright © 2018 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l AdministrationSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207