MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177223715 · doi:10.1017/jmo.2021.26

Perceived organizational politics and turnover intentions: critical roles of social adaptive behavior and emotional regulation skills

2021· article· en· W3177223715 on OpenAlexaff
Dirk De Clercq, Muhammad Arshad Khan, Inam Ul Haq

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management & Organization · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDysfunctional familyPsychologySocial psychologyPoliticsMechanism (biology)PerceptionOrganizational commitmentPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract With a basis in conservation of resources theory, this study investigates how social adaptive behavior might mediate the relationship between employees' perceptions of organizational politics and their turnover intentions, as well as a buffering role of their emotional regulation skills as a critical personal resource. Data collected from employees in the food sector reveal that beliefs about dysfunctional political games spur turnover intentions, driven by employees' unwillingness to adjust themselves to the actions of their organizational colleagues. This mediating role of social adaptive behavior, or its lack, is less salient when employees have a greater ability to control their own emotions though. For organizations, this study accordingly pinpoints a key mechanism—a reluctance to accommodate other members' preferences—by which perceived organizational politics can escalate into a desire to leave the organization. It also reveals how this mechanism can be better contained by employees' ability to remain calm, even in difficult situations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations27
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management & OrganizationSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207