A longitudinal person-centered investigation of organizational commitment trajectories among Canadian military recruits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This longitudinal study investigates the profiles underpinning the trajectories of affective organizational commitment observed across the basic training period and the subsequent 9 months of employment among a sample of 4859 military recruits and officer cadets. We also considered how these trajectories were associated with components of the onboarding process (i.e. perceived realism of job previews, socialization, satisfaction with the implications of military life for work–life balance, and identity conflict) and important outcome variables (turnover and transition intention, job satisfaction, and perceived performance). Three profiles were identified: (1) Committed, (2) Learning to Love, (3) Failure to Commit. Socialization and identity conflict were both associated with profile membership and within-profile differences in the shape of these trajectories. Employees’ satisfaction with the implication of military life for their work–life balance was linked to strong organizational commitment. In contrast, exposure to previews seen as more realistic seemed to help avoid very low levels of commitment. Profiles with higher and increasing levels of commitment displayed lower average levels of turnover and transition intentions and greater average levels of job satisfaction, although associations involving changes in these outcomes over time were much weaker. Associations with perceived performance at the end of basic training were minimal.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".