MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W829216704 · doi:10.4018/ijhcitp.2015070103

Understanding the Turnover Intentions of Information Technology Personnel

2015· article· en· W829216704 on OpenAlex
Faith‐Michael E. Uzoka, Alice P. Shemi, K.V. Mgaya, Okure Obot

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurnoverDeveloping countryAmbiguityJob satisfactionTurnover intentionRole conflictPsychologyAffect (linguistics)StressorSocial psychologyDemographic economicsJob dissatisfactionEconomicsManagementComputer scienceEconomic growthClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of the studies on IT personnel turnover intentions were carried out in the developed countries. Only a few researchers have focused on developing countries. The authors' study makes a comparative study of IT personnel turnover intentions in two sub-Saharan African countries (Botswana and Nigeria) using the Igbaria and Greenhaus turnover model. The intent was to find out if the same model elements affect turnover intentions in the two countries. The results show that demographic variables (age and length of service), the role stressors (role ambiguity and role conflict), the career related variables (growth opportunity, supervisor support and external career opportunities), job satisfaction and career satisfaction have direct effect on turnover intentions in these two developing countries, while other affectors in the research model do not hold equally for the two countries, except for growth opportunity.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.007
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.243 · 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