Occupational Science Value Propositions in the Field of Public Policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Public policy impacts on the occupational life spectrum of individuals and communities are ubiquitous. This paper explores the nexus between policy science and occupational science. Public policy is defined and the relevance to occupational life and occupational salience is explored. Two occupational science meta-value propositions are put forward to support interdisciplinary dialogue within policy science that can be used to respond to societal transformations and the development of public policy. Economic downturns and globalization are two scenarios used to provide examples of the intersections of occupational science and policy science. These scenarios are used to expand on the value and potential of occupational science to inform public policy through the application of policy levers. This paper opens the door for occupational scientists and public policy scientists to begin to engage in dialogue on the benefits of interdisciplinary approaches that can support the holistic consideration of knowledge needed to address the occupational complexity of lives and communities when occupation is disrupted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.073 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.075 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.030 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".