MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gossip Has It! An In-Depth Investigation of Malaysian Employees on Gossip Activities at Workplace

2013· article· en· W1541405921 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohd Mursyiddin Abdul Manaf, Erlane K Ghani, Ismie Roha Mohamed Jais

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGossipNonprobability samplingInterpersonal communicationQualitative researchPhenomenonPublic relationsSelection (genetic algorithm)SociologyTheoretical samplingPsychologySocial psychologyComputer scienceSocial sciencePolitical scienceEpistemologyGrounded theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study aims at understanding the reasons for conception of gossiping phenomenon among private and public sector employees in Malaysia. Data for this research was gathered through in-depth interviews, which involved 15 informants that had been chosen through purposive sampling, aided by criterion-based selection and being conducted through theoretical sampling. In terms of gossip conception, data from informants have contributed to 8 themes that have been divided into two categories - pertain to content and pertain to functions. From these categories, the researchers conclude that gossip continues to be a firm feature of social and organisational landscapes, whereby without these social activities, interpersonal communication that harnesses the organisational communication would not be able to develop.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.280
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationFrench-language works237,207