MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Commentary on the Multidimensional Degree of Family Influence Construct and the F–PEC Measurement Instrument

2005· article· en· W2056184141 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer E. Cliff, P. Devereaux Jennings

Bibliographic record

VenueEntrepreneurship Theory and Practice · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFamily Business Performance and Succession
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstruct (python library)Reliability (semiconductor)Construct validityDegree (music)PsychologyPower (physics)Computer sciencePsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this commentary, we provide suggestions for further establishing the validity of the multidimensional degree of family influence construct and the reliability of the family influence on power, experience, and culture (F–PEC) measurement instrument. We also delineate a number of creative ways in which future researchers can incorporate this rigorous, relevant, and rich construct into their own research agendas.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.171
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.171
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.018
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0090.004
Research integrity0.0360.056
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.208 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations64
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntrepreneurship Theory and PracticeSame topicFamily Business Performance and SuccessionFrench-language works237,207