## A Comparison of Two Utility Models for Predicting Job Choices |

### What people are saying - Write a review

We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.

### Contents

A REVIEW OF THE UTILIZED THEORIES | 6 |

MODELS FOR PREDICTION OF UTILITIES | 12 |

Characteristics Used in Hypothetical | 15 |

12 other sections not shown

### Common terms and phrases

accept a job actual choice behavior actual responses appear in Table appears in Appendix binomial distribution city different city which correspond coefficients of Table Daneshgar decision theory Equation estimate the utilities estimated utility values experienced and non-experienced experienced candidates Experienced Non-experienced Subject experienced subjects F-ratio Furthermore high school level hypothesis of equally hypothetical job descriptions job offer Level of Position level of significance m=o level model in predicting Multiple Correlation multiple regression non-experienced candidates received null hypothesis number of candidates particular level Pearson's correlation coefficients predicted cumulative probabilities predicting the actual predictor of actual Prob probabilities of 50 probabilities of acceptance probability questionnaires R-values Rank-Ordered region regression analysis regression coefficients regression correlation coefficients regression model reject the null responses given salary levels salary offered satisfaction school is located University of Wisconsin utilities of subjects utility and probability Weighted Aggregate Analysis weighted aggregate model weighted aggregate questionnaires z-transformation