MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4231556356 · doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00249.x

Editors' Notes

2008· article· en· W4231556356 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hank Jenkins‐Smith, Warren S. Eller

Notice bibliographique

RevuePolicy Studies Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiquePolicy Transfer and Learning
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCyberspacePublishingLibrary sciencePolitical scienceSection (typography)State (computer science)Public relationsManagementSociologyOperations researchThe InternetLawComputer scienceWorld Wide WebEngineeringBusinessEconomicsAdvertising

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The Mission Statement of the Policy Studies Journal states: “Policy Studies Journal (PSJ) is dedicated to providing scholars with the finest theoretically grounded, empirically sound, and cutting edge research covering all aspects of public policy.” Four years ago, when we first took over management of the Journal, we used these words to guide and inform our editorial decisions. Long hours were spent discussing the selection and use of the editorial board; selection, retention, and updating of reviewers; but above all we focused on the words that filled the pages of the PSJ. In the beginning, we focused primarily on the words in the middle. The words that authors had submitted that link practice and theory, that inform and challenge, and that expand our collective horizon of knowledge. As time has progressed though, we have been drawn to all the other words not included within the text of articles, and how they have changed tells an interesting story about the course of research in our times. Of particular interest are the symbols of all the organizations involved with the current Journal production. These include the University of Oklahoma, the University of Kansas, Louisiana State University, the APSA Policy Section, the Policy Studies Organization, and Blackwell Publishing. These organizations are now all staples of our production, but this particular issue also owes credit to the University of Colorado Denver and George Washington University. With the advent of our modern information sharing tools, the actual “home” of the Journal is somewhere in cyberspace, and the end product benefits from the timely contributions from many centers throughout the country. This is not unlike the research we have been publishing as of late, where the majority of the work is coauthored and many of those partnerships are across institutions as opposed to within one. With the advances in communications and data sharing, there is a rapid deterioration of the restrictions imposed by locale and institution. This change is evident in the body of the Journal as well. Beyond the institutions of the authors listed here, there is also a broadening of the substantive content. The articles in this current issue all examine policy impacts applicable worldwide, with a majority assessing impacts measured internationally. Our lead article, by Alok Bohara, Mani Nepal, and Nejem Raheem (University of New Mexico) and Neil Mitchell (University of Aberdeen), present a cross-national evaluation of the effects of organizational transparency on opposition repression. The second article, authored by Diane Stone (University of Warwick), endeavors to clarify the concept of “global public policy,” and the new processes and managerial modes associated with this new transnational governance. Our third piece, authored by Jeffrey Kash (Western Kentucky University), applies the policy design elements developed by Ingram and Schneider to agricultural conservation policy. We close this first issue with the second (and final) installment of our symposium on Voluntary Environmental Programs (VEPs), guest edited by Jorge Rivera (George Washington University) and Peter deLeon (University of Colorado Denver). This set of papers extends the questions of interest pursued in the last issue to include the effect of country on the outcomes of voluntary programs. The first article, by Magali Delmas (University of California San Barbara) and Ivan Montiel (University of Texas Pan American) examines the diffusion of self-regulatory programs cross-nationally. Nicole Darnall and Stephen Sides (George Mason University) examine the effects of certification on program performance, and Allen Blackman (Resources for the Future) studies voluntary regulation in developing countries. The set closes with Irene Henriques and Perry Sadorsky (York University) analyzing the implementation of VEPs in the Canadian context. As always, our editorial policies are designed to bring you the best writing in public policy, covering the range of theoretical and substantive developments in the field. We continue to urge you to send your best papers to the Policy Studies Journal.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,010
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,101
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: Éditorial
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,345
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,934

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0100,101
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0040,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,001
Communication savante0,0070,005
Science ouverte0,0060,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,007
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,3450,268

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,129
Tête enseignante GPT0,436
Écart entre enseignants0,307 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePolicy Studies JournalMême sujetPolicy Transfer and LearningTravaux en français237 207