MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201996486 · doi:10.1177/08948453211043878

Work Values and Job Satisfaction: The Mediating Role of Basic Psychological Needs at Work

2021· article· en· W3201996486 on OpenAlexafffund
Mathieu Busque‐Carrier, Catherine F. Ratelle, Yann Le Corff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Career Development · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsJob satisfactionPsychologyWork (physics)Social psychologyPsychological interventionValue (mathematics)Work motivation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the mediating role of basic psychological needs at work in the association from work values to job satisfaction. Using a four-factor model of work values, we tested how each work value factor was related to basic psychological need satisfaction and frustration at work. The sample included 228 workers (72% female) surveyed twice over a 7-week interval. Results showed that need satisfaction at work was positively predicted by intrinsic and social work values and negatively predicted by extrinsic work values. Need frustration at work was positively predicted by extrinsic and status work values and negatively predicted by intrinsic work values. Also, need satisfaction fully mediated the relationship from intrinsic, extrinsic, and social work values to job satisfaction. These findings suggest that organizational and career development interventions aiming to enhance employees need satisfaction at work should aim to promote growth-oriented work values endorsement rather than instrumental work values.

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)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations61
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Career DevelopmentSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207