MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005874270 · doi:10.1177/0276146708316561

An Introduction to the Invited Commentaries on Macromarketing Education

2008· article· en· W2005874270 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 Macromarketing · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Marketing Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMacromarketingCurriculumSession (web analytics)SociologyEngineering ethicsArgument (complex analysis)PedagogyMarketingEngineeringMedicineBusinessAdvertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2007 International Society on Marketing and Development and Macromarketing Society joint conference included a special session addressing issues involved in incorporating macromarketing courses into business curricula. The session featured five marketing educators with experience teaching macromarketing courses. Each speaker was asked to prepare a commentary in response to the following three questions: (1) Are macromarketing courses well suited for helping students build critical thinking and logical argument skills? (2) Should macromarketing courses be electives, required courses, or some combination of both? (3) What benefits to students and to other college stakeholders stem from incorporating macromarketing education into marketing curricula? The following essays summarize the talks presented during the 2007 special session.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.230 · 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