MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028194480 · doi:10.1177/0021886300363008

Response to Farias and Johnson’s Commentary

2000· article· en· W2028194480 on OpenAlex
Nicolay Worren, Keith Ruddle, Karl Moore

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

VenueThe Journal of Applied Behavioral Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Even the field's lead ers admit that orga ni za tional devel op ment (OD) has had problems adapt ing to the need for better approaches to man ag ing change.For exam ple, Burke (1997) observed that OD prac ti tio ners stood on the side lines and watched while new man age ment tech niques were being intro duced.In a review of the sociotechnical sys tems (STS) tra di tion, Mathews (1997) con cluded that there were prac ti cally no exam ples of com pa nies that had cho sen STS over com pet ing approaches such as business pro cess reengineering.Around the world, busi ness pro cess reengineering was the choice for firms intend ing to trans form their work pro cesses through the use of informa tion tech nol ogy (IT).Although we can all agree that the reengineering approach was flawed in some respects, it behooves OD prac ti tio ners to crit i cally exam ine why their con ven tional frame works and meth ods lost out in the mar ket place so com pletely.As Mathews noted, more effort was spent by pro po nents of STS on ideo log i cal contests than on devel op ing sound meth od ol o gies and pro ce dures that would have taken STS into the main stream and linked it with IT inno va tions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.348 · 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