MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048385611 · doi:10.5465/amj.2007.28166219

Building Theoretical and Empirical Bridges Across Levels: Multilevel Research in Management

2007· article· en· W2048385611 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

VenueAcademy of Management Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultilevel modelMultidisciplinary approachKnowledge managementEmpirical researchSociologyManagement scienceComputer scienceEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most management problems involve multilevel phenomena, yet most management research uses a single level of analysis. A micro or a macro lens alone yields incomplete understanding at either level. Multilevel research addresses the levels of theory, measurement, and analysis required to fully examine research questions. This forum presents multilevel research on bribery, national identity, team boundary spanning, professional role identity, organizational citizenship, interorganizational exchanges, and divestitures. To enrich the impact of future management research, we recommend (1) applying multilevel designs to existing models (2) considering bottom-up effects, (3) collaborating across disciplines on multidisciplinary topics, and (4) addressing major real-world problems via multilevel approaches.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.671
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
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 science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.300 · 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