HRM Practices and Organizational Commitment Profiles
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
In this study, we examined how employee perceptions of development-oriented, stability-oriented, and reward-oriented human resource management (HRM) practices affected the likelihood of affective and continuance commitment profile membership. Our focus on profiles of combined commitment components is a departure from a literature dominated by studies of the separate forms of employee commitment. Drawing from self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan 2000) we described the nature of the psychological states believed to underlie the specific profiles under investigation, then tested a series of theoretical predictions concerning the link between HRM practices and the likelihood of profile membership. Predictor and criterion data for this study were collected from 317 respondents working in a variety of Canadian-based organizations. Our findings suggest ways that organizations can use HRM practices strategically to help shape the nature of overall employee commitment.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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