MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084132487 · doi:10.1080/02642060802342661

A multi-sector comparison of relational learning and information and communication technologies adoption

2010· article· en· W2084132487 on OpenAlexaff
Juan‐Gabriel Cegarra‐Navarro, Anthony Wensley, Eusebio-Ángel Martínez-Conesa

Bibliographic record

VenueService Industries Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformation and Communications TechnologyOrder (exchange)Process (computing)Knowledge managementBusinessEmpirical researchStructural equation modelingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper analyses the nature of the impact of relational learning on the adoption of information and communication technologies (ICT) and vice versa. The authors investigate the implementation of ICT through a relational learning process by means of an empirical investigation of 203 small- and medium-sized enterprises in the Spanish telecommunication and the Spanish construction industries (107 firms from the telecommunications sector and 96 from the construction sector). In the analysis, it is proposed that the relational learning process can be structured into three phases (transfer, transformation, and harvesting of knowledge). Structural equation modelling reveals that, in order to implement these relational learning phases, companies need to provide and support ICT as prior steps and this is most significant for those in the telecommunications sector. These results have implications for managers when they come to formulating policies and making a choice as to the organisational capabilities to target in order to ensure the effective adoption of ICT.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueService Industries JournalSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207