Investigating New Zealand workers' willingness to provide expatriates with information and social support in the New Zealand workplace : a thesis presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Psychology at Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New Zealand organisations are required to ‘import’ expatriates to fill skills shortages in \nthe labour market caused by ‘brain drain’. A major contributor towards retaining \nexpatriates in their New Zealand jobs for as long as possible is the amount of help, such \nas information and social support, expatriates receive from their local co-workers. The \npresent study set out to explore New Zealand workers’ willingness to provide \ninformation and social support to expatriates, and subsequently understand New \nZealand workers’ psychological motivations for providing help to expatriates in New \nZealand workplaces. Specifically, the present study tested the similarity of expatriates’ \ncountries-of-origin to New Zealand, the social dominance of expatriates’ countries-oforigin \nand the threat that expatriates pose to finite work-related resources as \npsychological motivators for providing or withholding help to expatriates. Fifty-six \nSubject Matter Experts who had approximately 13 years experience with observing \nrelationships in New Zealand workplaces completed an online scenario-based \nquestionnaire. The questionnaire presented seven fictitious expatriates from Britain, \nAustralia, Canada, South Africa, USA, Japan and India, and asked participants to \nestimate the typical helping preferences of New Zealand workers towards the above \nexpatriates. Kendall’s Tau rank correlation coefficients (!) indicated that, as suggested \nby the present sample of Subject Matter Experts, New Zealand workers’ willingness to \nprovide information was related to their willingness to provide social support for \nexpatriates from Australia, Canada, South Africa and USA; but not for expatriates from \nBritain, Japan and India. Overall, as rated by the present sample of Subject Matter \nExperts, Sign tests indicated that New Zealand workers were most willing to help a) \nBritish and Australian expatriates, then b) Canadian, South African and American \nexpatriates, and lastly, c) Japanese and Indian expatriates. Kendall’s tau rank correlation \ncoefficients (!) indicated that the above pattern of preferences for helping was largely \ninfluenced by similarity and threat of expatriates; specifically, New Zealand workers, as \nrated by Subject Matter Experts, were more willing to help more similar and more \nthreatening expatriates. In the present study, social dominance of expatriates’ countriesof- \norigin was not rated as a significant predictor of New Zealand workers’ willingness \nto help expatriates. The discussion presents various implications for stakeholders \ninvolved with expatriate transfers to New Zealand.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".