Investigating the relationship between accountability and job satisfaction: A case study in hospitals affiliated to Yazd University of Medical Sciences 2017
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: high accountability of employees, the organization can be helped to achieve the goals. In general, this research is to investigate the relationship between accountability and job satisfaction in nurses in an educational hospital affiliated to Yazd University of Medical SciencesMethod: This study was a descriptive study of correlation type that has been conducted a cross-sectional study in 2017. We involved 190 nurses from selected educational hospitals affiliated to the Yazd University of Medical Sciences in the city of Yazd that have been chosen by stratified random sampling method. The data collection tool was Costa and M Care Accountability Questionnaire concerning 12 items, and Kendall and Smith Job Satisfaction Questionnaire were 37 items. Likert's 5 scales were used to determine the score of accountability and job satisfaction. The data was analyzed by descriptive-analytical statistical tests and Pearson correlation coefficient, a significance level of 0.05, and in the SPSS software version 20.Results: there was no significant relationship between accountability and job satisfaction except one of job satisfaction (nature of work) (p=0.009). Also, a significant association was observed between three demographic variables of the age group (31-35) years (p=0.047) and work experience between (11-15) years (p=0.03) and the gender of women (p = 0.005) and two variables of accountability and satisfaction.Conclusion: According to the results, it is better to pay more attention to work nature to implement responsibilities more efficiently and increase job 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".