MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963479345

Determinants of job satisfaction and turnover intention of IT professionals in Japan

2020· article· en· W2963479345 on OpenAlexaff
Hiroshi Sasaki, Alexander Serenko, Osam Sato, Prashant Palvia

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob satisfactionCollectivismFriendshipPsychologyContext (archaeology)Turnover intentionSocial psychologyJob attitudeWork (physics)Job performancePolitical scienceEngineeringIndividualism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the IT workplace in Japan in the context of rapidly changing technological innovation and a long-standing collectivist culture in Japanese firms. Particularly, it examines a) the determinants of job satisfaction, such as self-efficacy and friendship networks on the positive side, and work exhaustion and work-home conflict on the negative side; and b) how these factors affect job turnover intention. Results from SEM analysis suggest that both self-efficacy and friendship networks have a positive impact on job satisfaction, while work exhaustion negatively impacts job satisfaction. Comparing workplace-derived factors (self-efficacy and work exhaustion) with collectivism-derived factors (friendship networks and work-home conflict), the former has a greater impact on job satisfaction than the latter. Additionally, this study examines the effect of organizational age on the relationships between the model constructs.

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)0.002
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207