MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897399924 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v11n11p8

The Relationships among Emotional Demand, Job Demand, Emotional Exhaustion and Turnover Intention

2018· article· en· W2897399924 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
N.T. Azharudeen, Arul Arulrajah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmotional exhaustionAbsenteeismTurnoverContext (archaeology)Turnover intentionClothingBivariate analysisBusinessEmotional laborPsychologyJob satisfactionSocial psychologyBurnoutEconomicsClinical psychologyManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of this paper are to assess the levels of job demand, emotional demand, emotional exhaustion and employee turnover intention and to examine the relationships among these concepts in the context of three selected apparel manufacturing firms in Eastern region of Sri Lanka. Employee absenteeism and turnover are key issues of apparel firms in Sri Lanka. In order to achieve the objectives of this paper, a questionnaire based survey was conducted among 153 employees of apparel firms and collected data were analyzed by using univariate and bivariate techniques. The findings of this paper revealed that there is a strong positive relationship between emotional demand and emotional exhaustion, emotional demand and turnover intention, job demand and turnover intention, and emotional exhaustion and turnover intention. At the same time, there is a moderate positive relationship between job demand and emotional exhaustion. The findings of the study have various managerial implications for the apparel manufacturing firms to prevent or control employee stress, absenteeism and turnover related issues and to develop good labour-management relationship.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207