MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282050653 · doi:10.1108/jmd-10-2021-0284

Detached but not deviant: the impact of career expectations and job crafting on the dysfunctional effects of amotivation

2022· article· en· W4282050653 on OpenAlexaff
Huda Masood, Len Karakowsky, Mark Podolsky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management Development · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmotivationDeviance (statistics)PsychologyDysfunctional familySocial psychologyPsychological interventionClinical psychologyIntrinsic motivation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This study aims to investigate the link between amotivation and workplace deviance. The authors further outlined how the relationship between amotivation and deviant behavior can be mitigated via proactive work strategies such as job crafting and career outcome expectations. Design/methodology/approach The authors conducted a convergent design, mixed-method study to investigate workplace deviance as an outcome of amotivation or the lack of motivation towards an activity. The quantitative data from cross-sectional surveys entailed 127 respondents. The qualitative data comprised of 25 in-depth interviews. The authors sought insights from individuals' lived experiences to understand how amotivated individuals behave at work. Findings The quantitative findings contended a significant relationship between amotivation and organizational deviance. The authors also found evidence for the buffering role of career outcome expectations on amotivation and deviance. Finally, avoidance job crafting has been shown to significantly attenuate the aforementioned relationship. The qualitative study identified three broader themes about amotivated individuals' work outcomes. Practical implications Amotivation can arise among individuals who feel trapped in a job they want to exit and can result in a range of dysfunctional outcomes including workplace deviance. While amotivated employees may be hard to flag, employers can keep such individuals from demonstrating workplace deviance through placing interventions such as job crafting and career development programs. Originality/value The existing literature on work motivation has predominantly overlooked the role of amotivation in determining employee outcomes. The current research generates a new line of inquiry by identifying workplace deviance as an outcome of amotivation. The authors further highlighted that such dysfunctional outcomes of amotivation can be mitigated by job crafting and career outcomes expectancies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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