Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to contribute to this literature on developing countries by investigating the determinants of job satisfaction in Vietnam where the economics literature on this issue is virtually non-existent. The authors also contribute to the literature on income comparison by extending beyond the within-firm co-worker income comparison. Design/methodology/approach The authors estimate a generalized order logit model for job satisfaction as statistical tests suggest that the parallel-lines assumption, which is often invoked in previous studies using the standard logit model, does not hold. Findings For Vietnam, the authors find that absolute and relative incomes as well as human resource practices such as efficiency wage and training policy have an impact on workers’ satisfaction. Workers in the foreign direct investment (FDI) sectors behave a bit differently from their peers in the domestic sector. Originality/value Taking advantage of a unique matched employer–employee data set collected in 2008 by the North-South Institute (Canada) and the Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences, the authors are able to investigate the impact of a number of important job characteristics on job satisfaction such as absolute and reference incomes, wage policy, training plan for workers, union membership and job position, and, at the same time, to disentangle the possible differences in job satisfaction of workers in domestic vs FDI firms.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it