Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 428

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

PROFILES IN QUITTING: INTEGRATING PROCESS AND CONTENT TURNOVER THEORY.

Maertz, C. P., Campion, M. A.·2004·Academy of Management Journal

Abstract

Process models of turnover focus on how people quit; content models focus on why. To integrate these approaches and test whether motives relate systematically to decision processes, we classified 159 leavers using four process types and measured eight content motives for leaving. One key finding was that those who quit with no job alternative had more negative affect than users of other decision types, suggesting affect-driven, impulsive quitting. Results suggest that process-content integration is a fruitful direction for turnover research. “Voluntary employee turnover ” is one of the most studied behaviors in management research

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/20159602

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 428

Metadata

Authors
Maertz, C. P., & Campion, M. A.
Venue
Academy of Management Journal
Published
2004-08-01
Volume
47
Issue
4
Pages
566-582
ISSN
  • 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-0989
OpenAlex
W2149338970
Cited by
428
References
4
FWCI
17.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.