MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063761998 · doi:10.1177/0170840604045092

The Characteristics of Chinese Personal Ties (Guanxi): Evidence from Hong Kong

2004· article· en· W2063761998 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

VenueOrganization Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuanxiClosenessChinaFace (sociological concept)PsychologySocial psychologyUnit (ring theory)Family tiesStrong tiesInterpersonal tiesSociologyPolitical scienceGenealogyLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A widely held view in management is that guanxi(or Chinese personal connections) are a key element in the success of East Asian economies. In spite of their importance, very little is known about the various characteristics of guanxi. Using data obtained from Hong Kong respondents, we found that classmates, club members, and family friends are guanxibases from which the respondents developed close relationships. Contrary to expectations, associates who work with the respondents or are distant family relatives, or both, tend to have distant relationships with the respondents. We also found that the effect of gender on the closeness of relationships is asymmetrical, with female-to-female dyads being close and male-to-male dyads being distant. Further, our study shows that there is a tendency to request ‘costly’ favors from family members instead of nonfamily members. Lastly, we provide some evidence linking the size of one’s network to one’s ‘face’ in society. Overall, the results suggest a weakening of the family unit in Chinese societies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.282 · 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