The Impacts of Working Conditions and Employee Competences of Fresh Graduates on Job Expertise, Salary and Job Satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the factors that have critical impacts on job expertise and further analyses on how the jobs affect salary and job satisfaction. Job seekers consider the working conditions when seeking jobs. However, he/she will acquire an ideal job or not, it depends on his/her employee competences. The former is his/her job demands and expectations and the latter is the ability he/she has. These two factors determine his/her job expertise which further influences the salary and job satisfaction. The data are collected from those new graduates who entering the workforce from Taiwan's universities in 2009 and structural equation modeling is applied for data analysis. Three findings are presented. First of all, the correlation coefficient is 0.40 which indicates strong relationship when it comes to the relation of employee competences and working conditions. Secondly, employee competences have significantly positive impacts on job expertise, salary and job satisfaction. However, working conditions have significantly negative impacts on salary. Finally, job expertise has significantly positive impacts on salary and job satisfaction but salary has no significant impacts on job satisfaction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".