Cultural intelligence and cooperation in the construction industry: the mediating role of trust
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
Purpose This study aims to investigate the mediating role of trust in the relationship between cultural intelligence (CQ) and cooperation among construction professionals. Furthermore, this study assesses perceived differences in CQ, trust and cooperation between individuals with and without experience working with foreigners in the construction industry. Design/methodology/approach Data were gathered from a cross-sectional survey of 408 engineers in Myanmar’s construction industry. A confirmatory factor analysis validated structural equation modeling approach was used to address research hypotheses, and an independent samples t-test was performed to identify the perceived differences between two categories of respondents. Findings The structural equation modeling results identified CQ as a positive direct predictor of cooperation, affect-based trust and cognition-based trust. Both affect-based trust and cognition-based trust directly and positively influenced cooperation. The relationship between CQ and cooperation was partially mediated by affect-based trust and cognition-based trust. The findings of the independent samples t-test revealed that construction employees with prior experience working with foreigners tend to exhibit a higher level of CQ, trust and cooperation than their counterparts. Originality/value The present study added the mediating role of trust in CQ and cooperation linkage, an area that has received limited attention in the literature.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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