Understanding employee xenocentrism in foreign firm employment: a scale development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the growth in the number of foreign firms with subsidiaries or joint ventures in developing countries, no measures of employee xenocentrism exist to guide research into the consequences of such developments from an employee perspective. Affective associations can be expected in any employment decision due to the perceived superiority of the foreign over the domestic. This study aims to develop and test a measure of employee xenocentrism that can help explain why and when employees might prefer working for a foreign company. A multimethod approach was followed to establish the new measure, which has three dimensions: Professional Development, defined as the perception of the development opportunities when working in a developing country for a foreign company; Prestige, the affective status-related advantages of working for a foreign company; and Working Environment, the perceptions of the relative advantages and disadvantages of working for a domestic or foreign company. The measure achieves good validity. It predicts the likelihood of respondents wanting to work for companies from countries with stronger economies or for a domestic company. Its expected relationship with job satisfaction and engagement depends on whether respondents have experience working for a foreign company and how international the respondent is.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".