MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804253528 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2018.4.020

Financial well-being among Malaysian manufacturing employees

2018· article· en· W2804253528 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shiau Wei Chan, Siti Sarah Omar, Wen Yong

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia
KeywordsMarital statusBusinessAffect (linguistics)Position (finance)Well-beingOrder (exchange)ManufacturingFinanceMarketingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Employees and financial well-being are two aspects that are closely related to each other, and have been deeply studied by researchers.Not only can financial well-being directly affect an individual, but it can also indirectly affect his/her organization as well as employer.Any level of financial employees' well-being, either low or high, will change their job performance.Thus, the purpose of this study is to determine the level of financial well-being among manufacturing employees in Batu Pahat, as well as to test the relationships between determinants and financial well-being among manufacturing employees in Batu Pahat.In this study, seven research hypotheses were developed to examine seven determinants, including age, income, gender, education, current job position, income, and marital status which influence employees' financial well-being.In this study, 220 employees at the production level were selected randomly from a manufacturing company in Batu Pahat, Johor, Malaysia.Then, a questionnaire was distributed to the employees.The data obtained were analyzed quantitatively using SPSS version 22.0.The results of this study revealed that the level of financial well-being was moderate and all of the determinants were positively related to financial well-being among the manufacturing employees.This quantitative study is important to the manufacturing industry in Malaysia in order to gain insight on the correlation between financial well-being and its determinants.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207