An Examination of Mentors’ Interpersonal Behaviors and Mentees’ Motivation, Turnover Intentions, Engagement, and Well-Being
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
= 358) examines how mentors' interpersonal behaviors relate to both motivation at work and motivation for a mentoring relationship and how these two contexts of motivation can differentially relate to mentees' work outcomes. Results revealed that mentors' need-supportive interpersonal behaviors were associated with greater autonomous motivation at work and in the mentoring relationship and, in turn, to greater well-being and work engagement, and to lower turnover intentions. In contrast, need-thwarting interpersonal behaviors were associated with greater controlled motivation at work and in the mentoring relationship and, in turn, to lower well-being and work engagement, and to greater turnover intentions. Overall, this study illustrates the impact of the mentor-mentee relationship on motivation for work and for the mentoring relationship and provided support for the contribution of both motivational contexts in the work-related outcomes of employees in the workplace.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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