MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Magic of Networking: Who Will Exit? Who Will Be Promoted?

2013· article· en· W1861112314 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yuan Jia

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Capital and Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFriendshipOrder (exchange)Perspective (graphical)MAGIC (telescope)Public relationsPower (physics)BusinessInformation sharingInternet privacyComputer sciencePsychologySocial psychologyWorld Wide WebPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We network every day, and networking is an important tool of sharing information among individuals. Most of the successful employees develop the skills of networking to create relationships with others, meet new people, and share more information that will move them toward achieving the goals to succeed in career. Based on case studies, we analyze the advice network, friendship network, and cooperative network from the perspective of social network analysis. Our results show that people who maximize the power of network in order to achieve professional goals are more prone to offer a long-term commitment to the company and the chance of being promoted is relatively high, whereas those shy people who are not good at networking are more likely to leave.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.244 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicSocial Capital and NetworksFrench-language works237,207