MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006754274 · doi:10.1002/crq.242

Bridging the theory‐and‐practice gap: Mediator power in practice

2009· article· en· W2006754274 on OpenAlexaff
Arghavan Gerami

Bibliographic record

VenueConflict Resolution Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict Management and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitive reframingBridging (networking)MediatorMediationPower (physics)ScholarshipPsychologySocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceMedicineSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Although mediators are assumed to be neutral third parties, effective fulfillment of their role involves exercising a significant amount of authority and power. Mediators employ a range of approaches, orientations, and strategies. This article reviews some of the scholarship in this area. It then examines the various dimensions of mediator power, looking specifically at (1) the nature of mediator power and (2) its exercise of power through knowledge and expertise, through designing and controlling the process through reframing, and through imposing pressure to settle. Finally, the article discusses “ethical mediation” in light of mediator power.

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)0.076
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.097
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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0760.097
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.067
Scholarly communication0.0220.028
Open science0.0030.018
Research integrity0.0100.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations31
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConflict Resolution QuarterlySame topicConflict Management and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207