A motivational standpoint of job insecurity effects on organizational citizenship behaviors: A generational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our research reports an empirical analysis of a path model linking job insecurity to organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) via two mediators, that is, intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. The aim is to evaluate the path model invariance across three generational cohorts, that is, generation X, generation Y, and generation Z. A sample of employees in service companies based in Canada was surveyed. We utilized a partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) approach, which included path analysis and multi-group analysis (MGA) to test proposed hypotheses. We found that job insecurity negatively predicted intrinsic motivation which positively related to job satisfaction. Job satisfaction influenced OCBs positively. Both intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction mediated the indirect effects of job insecurity onto OCBs. Generation X was more pronounced in their reaction to job insecurity than later generations given the strong negative effects on intrinsic motivation and hence on their job. However, generation Z employees followed their parents from generation X regarding engaging more in OCBs when they are satisfied with their job than generation Y. In general, therefore, it should come as no surprise that generation X employees' OCBs can be expected to plummet due to the elevated levels of job insecurity during pandemic times (e.g., COVID-19) more intensely than Generation Y. Clearly, with COVID-19 having led many organizations around the world to adopt virtual workplace environments, generational differences amongst employees have to be considered as a matter of crucial concern for these organizations.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".