MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993365382 · doi:10.1177/0896920510365917

Capitalizing Knowledge: The Mind-Set of Academic Scientists

2010· article· en· W1993365382 on OpenAlexaff
James Dzisah

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Sociology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapitalizationOpenness to experienceKnowledge productionSociology of scientific knowledgeGovernment (linguistics)Set (abstract data type)CapitalismSociologyKnowledge economyPolitical sciencePublic relationsEngineering ethicsEpistemologySocial scienceKnowledge managementEngineeringPsychologyLawSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in generic forms of knowledge have reflexively transformed the form and content of knowledge production and academic institutions. This unique alteration has resulted in the initiation of steps by most universities and public policy regimes to increase the economic outcomes of their research. Utilizing qualitative in-depth interviews, the article explores the mind-set of academic scientists regarding the capitalization of knowledge. It notes that any critical analysis of patterns of knowledge capitalization will reveal that university, industry and government have all been influencing each other in varying forms and contexts. While it can be argued that universities are not idyllic islands now being crushed under industrial interests, the case for scientific integrity in all knowledge regimes must continue to be made by both proponents and critics of academic capitalism within the spirit of openness and scientific boundaries.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.394 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical SociologySame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207