Relationships between personal factors, self-efficacy, psychological empowerment, organizational support, and professional behavior of Indonesian nurses, west java province, Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purposes of this descriptive research were to 1) study professional behavior and examine relationships between personal factors (educational level and working experience), self efficacy, psychological empowerment, organizational support, and professional behavior of Indonesian nurses, West Java province, Indonesia. Samples were 160 professional nurses included in this study. Study instruments were Personal factors, General Self Efficacy Scale (GSE), Perceived Organizational Support (POS), Psychological Empowerment Questionnaire (PEQ), and Professional Behavior Questionnaire (PBQ) examined content analysis by a panel of experts. The reliability with Cronbach’s alpha of GSE, POS, PEQ, and PBQ were .748, .888, .709, and .971 respectively. Data analysis were by using frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, Pearson correlation, and Chi-square. The study findings were as follows: 1. Professional behavior of professional nurses was at good level (x = 4.00, SD =0.47). 2. Personal factors including working experience and educational level were found: 2.1 Working experience was moderately and positively related to professional behavior at significance level of .05. (r=.499). 2.2 Educational level was moderately related to professional behavior at significance level of .05. (x2 = 20.36). 3. Organizational support was lowly and positively related to professional behavior at significance level of .05. (r=.210). 4. Psychological empowerment was moderately and positively related to professional behavior at significance level of .05. (r=.558). 5. Self efficacy was moderately and positively related to professional behavior at significance level of .05. (r=.576). The findings indicated that organizational support and psychological empowerment were positively related to professional behavior. Thus, nurse executive should support all materials for nursing practice and enhance psychological empowerment for professional nurses in order to increase professional behavior.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".