A Model and Test of Policymaking as Process
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prior policymaking literature has been largely theoretical and focused upon agenda setting and the initiation mechanisms of policy change, namely triggering events. Notably absent from the prior literature have been studies aimed at developing and empirically evaluating models of policymaking as a process with outcomes. Such a process/outcome model of policymaking would necessarily include initiation mechanisms, or triggering events, agenda setting, politics, and subsequent outcomes (intended vs. unintended). This paper applies such a process and outcome model through an evaluative case study of the tragic death of Martin Lee Anderson in a Florida juvenile boot camp. The death of Martin Lee Anderson in January, 2006 sparked a major debate and a series of subsequent policy initiatives in Florida related to juvenile boot camps, the treatment of juveniles in confinement, and overall accountability of the state’s juvenile justice system. Employing multiple data sources, the evaluation assesses the triggering events, subsequent processes, and resulting policy outcomes. The findings demonstrate that policymaking occurs in a sequential manner with identifiable stages. Different actors influence each stage of the process and help to shape the final policy outcomes. However, using the methods of in-depth interviews and participant observations revealed that outcomes are also shaped by various political negotiations which are not easily captured through conventional research and evaluation methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it