A bibliometric review of job satisfaction and organizational commitment in businesses area literatures
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
BACKGROUND: The bibliometric analysis and systematic appraisal of research on job satisfaction and organizational commitment in administrative and technical studies in the study show substantial efficacy, opening the path for future research in this subject. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this literature review is to identify important ideas that have the potential to influence job satisfaction and organizational commitment, as well as to provide the groundwork for future research in this field using bibliometric analysis. METHODS: This study used a bibliometric review approach to examine Web of Science papers on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. RESULTS: Performance, Impact, Transformational Leadership, Citizenship Behavior, Employee Performance, Organizational Justice, Job Satisfaction, Turnover, Psychological Empowerment, Organizational Commitment, Normative Commitment, Empowerment, and Turnover Intentions were the most frequently used terms in research on job satisfaction and organizational commitment, according to the survey. The bulk of these publications were published in the United States, China, Turkey, South Korea, Canada, Indonesia, Pakistan, Taiwan, and Jordan. IMPLICATIONS: The findings of the research may be used to generate articles on work satisfaction and organizational commitment in the field of market discipline, notably in the domains of business and technology.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.026 | 0.046 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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