MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891982862 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v11n10p86

A Conceptual Framework for the Association between Relationship Conflicts and Employees’ Intention to Leave

2018· article· en· W2891982862 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ranitha Sachinthana Weerarathna

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict Management and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationAssociation (psychology)Conceptual modelPsychologyTest (biology)VariablesSocial psychologyStructural equation modelingVariable (mathematics)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main objective of this research paper to conceptualize a model to test the association between relationship conflicts and employees’ intention to leave with the support of past theories and research findings. This research paper contains the definitions for variables related to relationship conflicts and employees’ intention to leave from the organization and also it explains models which explain the interconnections among two variables. The conceptualization of this research includes a logically developed model that leads to identify the relationships between the independent variable and dependent variable. The proposed model suggested that there is an association between relationship conflicts and employees’ intention to leave.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicConflict Management and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207