A Comparative Research of Paternalistic and Narcissistic Leadership on Intrinsic Motivation: Job Autonomy and Development Culture as Mediating Variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To inspire others, leaders must be visionary, communicate effectively, and possess the ability to motivate, as their actions influence employees' intrinsic motivation. Individuals driven by intrinsic factors find motivation in enjoyment or challenges rather than external rewards, pressure, or products. In contrast, narcissistic leaders perceive themselves as flawless and attribute their success solely to their own efforts, exhibiting traits such as arrogance, extreme self-love, unshakeable confidence, and hostility. n =218 employees were included in this study, in which the mediating role of Job Autonomy (JA) and Development Culture (DC) variables in the Paternalistic Leadership (PL) vs. Narcissistic Leadership (NL) and Intrinsic Motivation (IM) was investigated. The data obtained from volunteer participants from non-profit organisations in Istanbul were analysed by structural equation modeling. The findings revealed that PL positively and significantly affects IM through mediating variables, while NL significantly and negatively affects IM through these factors.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".