Épistémologies socio-sémiotiques et communication organisante : la coproduction de sens comme moteur de l’organisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente une synthèse des théories sémiotiques compatibles avec une approche communicationnelle des organisations. Les organisations sont définies comme la résultante d’un système d’interactions complexe orienté vers l’accomplissement de projets d’action. Les acteurs, par leur communication, structurent et résolvent trois niveaux de problèmes communicationnels correspondant à trois dimensions sémiotiques, les procédures de production de symboles, les schèmes interprétatifs des symboles et les actions motivées et orientées vers la provocation d’un effet organisant l’activité collective. Les dimensions sémiotiques de la communication reflètent la matrice sociale-cognitive qui les supporte. Les socio-sémiotiques ont revalorisé les approches phénoménologiques de l’organisation insistant sur l’importance des points de vue intersubjectifs et la matérialité des phénomènes de communication organisante. Les concepts et les méthodes socio‑sémiotiques outillent le chercheur en communication des organisations axé sur l’analyse du développement des organisations et de l’identité collective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".