MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094919114 · doi:10.1177/0018726712464802

The nuanced nature of work quality: Evidence from rural Newfoundland and Ireland

2013· article· en· W2094919114 on OpenAlex
Gordon B. Cooke, Jimmy Donaghey, Işık U. Zeytinoglu

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Relations · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Work (physics)Quality (philosophy)Affect (linguistics)SociologyQuality of working lifeSet (abstract data type)Social psychologyPublic relationsPsychologyJob satisfactionPolitical scienceGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the relationship between job and work quality and argues that while it is important to examine job quality, to understand workers’ experiences fully, the focus should be on the broader concept of work quality, which places the job against its wider socio-economic context. Based on the experiences of 88 rural workers gathered via interviews in Newfoundland and Ireland, it appears that the same or similar jobs can be regarded very differently depending upon the context in which they are embedded, as people at different locations and/or stages of life have an individual set of aspirations, expectations and life experiences. The study found that the factors that affect work quality are moulded by broader aspects of life – family, friends, community, lifestyle and past experiences – that shape an individual.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.354 · 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