MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The longitudinal effects of HIWP on new nurses' retention: The role of professional self-image.

2015· article· en· W2800686145 on OpenAlexaff
Denis Chênevert, Christian Vandenberghe

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionContext (archaeology)PsychologyProcess (computing)Professional developmentPoint (geometry)NursingMedical educationMedicinePedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the moderating role of nurses' professional self-image in the relationships between high involvement work practices (HIWP) and organizational and professional retention. Using a sample of 185 new nurses and a longitudinal design in which nurses' expectations and professional self-image were measured before they had been contaminated by the organizational context, the paper tests the dynamic nature of the exit process in the beginning of the nurses’ career. The presence of HIWP within the organization, professional self-image, and intention to leave the organization and the profession were measured in time 2 and allow us to understand the effect of the change. Finally, in Time 3, a third questionnaire was administered in order to record the number of nurses who had left the organization and/or the profession. The results obtained suggest that the change between the nurses’ expectations regarding HIWP and the perception of their presence in the workplace is positively related with a change in professional self-image. This professional self-image would have an impact on departure from the organization and from the profession through intention to leave the organization. In term of practical implications, the HIWP have an important impact on new nurses’ retention but there is a good reason to question the role education plays in creating expectations among new graduate nurses. The reality shock, the difference between the expectation and the reality, is the starting point of the withdrawal process.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management Proceedings→Same topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior→French-language works237,207→