MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045198957 · doi:10.1177/1050651906297167

Imaging the Organization: Language Use in Organizational Identity Claims

2007· article· en· W2045198957 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 Business and Technical Communication · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOrganizational Strategy and Culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganizational identityIdentity (music)CognitionLinguisticsProcess (computing)PsychologyKnowledge managementComputer scienceOrganizational commitmentSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates the cognitive linguistic processes involved in organizational identity construction through language-based identity claims. The organizational imaging process constructs an organization’s identity in relation to a system of positively and negatively valued conceptual categories. It involves using language to establish a classification scheme and to define the organization within this scheme. The authors develop a framework for identifying these cognitive linguistic processes based on a grounded-theory study of language use in corporate mission statements. Their findings contribute to a deeper understanding of language’s role in organizational identity construction.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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