MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994837612 · doi:10.1177/0149206308331096

Explaining Change: Theorizing and Testing Dynamic Mediated Longitudinal Relationships

2009· article· en· W1994837612 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicTeam Dynamics and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMediationContext (archaeology)Statistical hypothesis testingDynamic capabilitiesMultilevel modelScholarshipEpistemologyPsychologyComputer scienceSocial psychologySociologyKnowledge managementSocial sciencePolitical scienceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many disciplines of scholarship have developed theories that involve dynamic mediated (and multilevel) relationships among constructs. However, most research does not hypothesize or test these dynamic relationships in a manner consistent with theory. In this article, the authors address this disconnect by first noting the theoretical and methodological limitations of ignoring dynamic mediated (and multilevel) relationships. Specifically, the authors show that theory testing suffers and statistical conclusions are often erroneous when dynamic mediation is ignored. The authors then present several ways of conceptualizing dynamic mediated relationships and then turn to summarizing two statistical models for analyzing such data. They conclude with a brief example from a team performance context.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.241 · 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