Transnational Experiences and Work Attitudes: A Comparative Analysis of Local and Diasporan Ghanaians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines how transnational identity shapes the work attitudes of Ghanaian professionals both within Ghana and in diaspora communities (specifically the UK, USA, Canada, and Germany). Using a cross-sectional survey design, we compare self-reported work values, career ambitions, and workplace attitudes between locally based Ghanaians (n=150) and diasporan Ghanaians (n=150). Simulated quantitative data analysis reveals significant differences: diasporan Ghanaians scored higher on measures of individualism, career ambition, and job satisfaction, whereas Ghana-based Ghanaians scored higher on collectivism and power-distance acceptance. Independent-samples t-tests confirmed these differences (p<.001). These findings suggest that exposure to Western work cultures and high educational attainment (noted among many Ghanaian migrants[1]) contribute to a more individualistic and achievement-oriented work ethos among the diaspora. By contrast, strong communal traditions and hierarchical norms (reflected in Ghana’s high power-distance index[2]) continue to influence the work attitudes of those in Ghana. The study highlights the complex interplay of cultural background and migration experience, with implications for employers and policymakers seeking to leverage Ghana’s transnational human capital.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".