Does workplace incivility trigger the intention to self-initiate expatriation? An investigation among young Tunisian physicians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to examine the relationship between workplace incivility and the intention to self-initiate expatriation and whether this relationship is mediated by affective organizational commitment. It also explores the moderating role of career commitment in this proposed model. Design/methodology/approach The data were collected using a questionnaire among 145 young physicians from Tunisian hospitals. Hypotheses are tested using the PROCESS macro (models 4 and 7) in SPSS. Findings Workplace incivility is negatively related to affective organizational commitment, which in turn is related to the intention to self-initiate expatriation. Furthermore, career commitment moderates the indirect effect of workplace incivility on expatriate intention through affective organizational commitment. Specifically, when career commitment is high, the indirect effect on the intention to self-initiate expatriation is stronger. Originality/value This is one of the first studies to examine the indirect influence of workplace incivility on the intention to self-initiate expatriation. Moreover, it furthers our understanding of a contingent factor that influences 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".