MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411067845 · doi:10.35877/454ri.qems3230

The Evaluation of Leadership Styles and their Effects on Employee Attitude: Evidence from a Manufacturing Company in South Eastern Nigeria

2025· article· en· W4411067845 on OpenAlexaff
Ifeanyi Emmanuel Nwogbo, Abdulai Jalloh, Laurine Chikodiri Nwosu, Priscillia Nkem Onyibe, Jennifer Airiarebhe Aigbiremhon

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantitative Economics and Management Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicLeadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making Studies
Canadian institutionsGeorge Brown College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeadership styleBusinessManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leadership styles are widely acknowledged as a fundamental factor in determining organizational success, influencing the performance of employees and the overall organizational culture. How leaders manage their teams can greatly impact employee attitudes, motivation, and behaviours, affecting productivity, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Using an online survey, this quantitative study employed data collected from 373 staff members at a Manufacturing Company in Southeast Nigeria. The data collected was analyzed using SPSS version 20. Correlation and regression analyzes were conducted to test the relationship and impact among the variables. The findings highlighted the positive influence of democratic, transactional, autocratic, and transformational leadership on employee attitude. Furthermore, significant values were obtained for the correlation and effect between the constructs (p < 0.05). Therefore, adopting a multiple approach is recommended in leadership, rather than a singular style when dealing with employees in an organization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.409
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.042 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuantitative Economics and Management StudiesSame topicLeadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making StudiesFrench-language works237,207