MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130877051

WORK MOTIVATION TO AFECTIVE COMMITMENT THROUGH JOB SATISFACTION IN EMPLOYEES PRONAFA SKIN CLINIC

2020· article· en· W3130877051 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cynthia Ps Indasari, Eko Purwanto, Tri Kartika Pertiwi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmployee Performance and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork motivationJob satisfactionPsychologySample (material)Path analysis (statistics)Work (physics)Data collectionReward systemOrganizational commitmentSocial psychologyApplied psychologyStatisticsMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Employees are important components in a company, related to how the company can achieve its goals. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of work motivation (reward) on employee commitment through perceived satisfaction. The object used in this study is Pronafa Skin Clinic in Sidoarjo. Data collection was specifically carried out by distributing questionnaires to the study sample. The sample was determined using non-probability sampling techniques and obtained as many as 45 employees as research respondents. The analytical method used is path analysis with the SmartPLS program. The results found that both hypotheses were accepted. (1) The first result found that work motivation (reward) has a positive and significant effect on commitment. (2) The second result found that satisfaction has a significant role in mediating the effect of work motivation (reward) on commitment. Keywords: Work Motivation, Reward, Commitment, Satisfaction

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicEmployee Performance and ManagementFrench-language works237,207