Does international work experience pay off? The relationship between international work experience, employability and career success: A 30‐country, multi‐industry study
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
Abstract Drawing on human capital theory, our study examines the relationship between international work experience and individuals' career success in terms of promotions and subjective financial success. We propose that these relationships are mediated by external employability and hypothesise a moderating role of national‐level economic freedom. Using data from 19,421 respondents, residing in 30 countries and working in different occupational groups (managers, professionals, clerical and blue‐collar workers), our results suggest that international work experience is positively related to promotions and subjective financial success across our study's different national contexts. These positive relationships were mediated by individuals' perceived external employability. Some support for the moderation of the relationship between international work experience and employability through economic freedom was only found when we differentiate between different types of international work experience. The findings enhance our understanding of the association between international work experience and career success from a human capital perspective.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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