MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1900579184 · doi:10.1111/iops.12068

The Psychology of Corporate Social Responsibility and Humanitarian Work: A Person-Centric Perspective

2013· article· en· W1900579184 on OpenAlexaff
Deborah E. Rupp, Daniel P. Skarlicki, Ruodan Shao

Bibliographic record

VenueIndustrial and Organizational Psychology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationPerspective (graphical)Field (mathematics)Corporate social responsibilitySociologyIndustrial and organizational psychologyWork (physics)Public relationsManagementPsychologyEnvironmental ethicsEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceSocial scienceSocial psychologyEngineeringLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The field of industrial–organizational (I–O) psychology has and will continue to experience periods of growth and change. Our field has shifted and transformed along with society, through the industrial revolution, the human relations movement, the globalization of business, and the information age. And here we are, in 2013, at the cusp of what seems to be the beginning of a new stage in our development, this time evidenced by the marked attention that both the science and practice arms of I–O psychology are placing on issues of corporate social responsibility (CSR, Aguinis, 2011; Cruse, 2010; Scott et al. 2013)

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.066
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.228
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations49
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndustrial and Organizational PsychologySame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207