MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381512503 · doi:10.1177/00218863231181131

Perceived Supervisor Remorse and Turnover Intentions: The Role of Organization Based Self-Esteem and Affective Commitment

2023· article· en· W4381512503 on OpenAlexaff
Sadia Jahanzeb, Dave Bouckenooghe

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemorsePsychologySocial psychologySupervisorPerceptionOrganizational commitmentTurnoverConsistency (knowledge bases)Management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leadership behavior is essential for retaining employees. Using positive actions, leaders engage and motivate followers to allow little or no provision for turnover intentions. Even in case of adverse conduct, supervisors may correct their wrongful behavior by apologizing for their misdeeds, which helps to retain followers. Utilizing self-consistency theory, we explore how organization-based self-esteem (OBSE) is a pivotal mechanism that explains the relationship between employees’ perception of supervisor remorse and their turnover intentions, alongside the moderating role of affective commitment. Our analysis of three-wave data collected from employees from Pakistani organizations revealed that perceptions of supervisor remorse decrease turnover intention through strengthening OBSE. Employees’ psychological bonding accentuates the mediating role of OBSE with their organization. In general, our research demonstrates a crucial mechanism, employees’ self-confidence about their organizational position, through which the effect of perceived supervisor remorse on turnover intention is explained. Also, the findings show how employees’ affective commitment acts as a boundary condition invigorating this indirect effect.

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)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Applied Behavioral ScienceSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207