MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019068074 · doi:10.1353/scp.0.0089

Negotiating Roles and Relationships: Stepping Through the Minefield of Co-Authors and Textbook Publishers

2010· article· en· W2019068074 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John D. Hewitt, Robert M. Regoli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Scholarly Publishing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPublishing and Scholarly Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingNegotiationPersonality psychologyProduct (mathematics)Process (computing)Computer scienceInterdependenceSociologyWork (physics)Library scienceWorld Wide WebManagementPublic relationsMedia studiesPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawPersonalityEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When producing a single-author scholarly monograph that will be self-published, either in print format or digitally online, an author has complete control of the writing process, deadlines, and production of the product. On the other hand, publishing textbooks typically involves a number of interdependent participants, including co-authors and an assortment of publishing-company people (acquisition editors, developmental editors, copy editors, photo editors, marketing specialists, and sometimes more senior managing editors). Co-authors and editors bring unique personalities and egos to the writing project. Sometimes these personalities and egos work like a well-oiled machine; at other times they are significantly uncoordinated. This article examines the array of potentially problematic roles and relationships encountered when pursuing the publication of a co-authored textbook.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0920.160
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.005
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.200 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Scholarly PublishingSame topicPublishing and Scholarly CommunicationFrench-language works237,207