The Relationship Between Management Style Perceptions and Motivation Levels of the Employees Working in Provincial Organizations of the General Directorate of Sports
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
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between management style perceptions and motivation levels of the employees working in provincial organizations of the General Directorate of Sports. The population of the study included the employees carrying on their duties in Provincial Organizations of The General Directorate of Sports, and the sample included totally 407 employees with 112 females and 295 males working in fourteen provinces selected from seven geographical regions of Turkey with a population density representing Turkey. “Management Style Scale” and “Motivation Scale” were used in the study. The “Management Style Scale” (MSS) developed by the researcher included the components and subscales as “authoritarian management style”, “protective management style”, “supportive management style”, “collaborative management style”, “laissez-faire management style”, and “intrinsic” and “extrinsic” motivation styles developed by Mottaz (1985). T-Test and One-Way Variance Analysis (ANOVA) were used for the analysis of the obtained data. As result, a significant and positive relationship was found between intrinsic motivation and management style sub-dimensions. In addition, a significant and positive relationship was also determined between the dimensions of extrinsic motivation and authoritarian management style and laissez-faire management style.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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