MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096247510 · doi:10.1177/0891241608318012

The Worldview of Hospital Security Staff

2008· article· en· W2096247510 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Contemporary Ethnography · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsSouth Health CampusAlberta Health ServicesSaskatchewan Health Quality CouncilPenticton Regional HospitalAlberta HealthMinistry of HealthUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeferencePsychological interventionIntermediaryEnforcementCompliance (psychology)Affect (linguistics)Control (management)Public relationsInterpretation (philosophy)EthnographyBusinessSociologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologyLawNursingPsychologyEconomicsMedicineMarketingManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interventions to encourage compliance with smoking control policies often rely on intermediaries for implementation, and the culture of the intermediary group might affect policy implementation. The authors present an ethnography of security staff involved in enforcing restrictive smoking policies in a large hospital in Canada. They find strong norms associated with control, mutuality, and deference to authority. Common sense interpretation rather than strict enforcement of rules prevails. To be enforced effectively, smoking policy would have to compete with other duties and elevate the security staff's perceived status in the eyes of visitors, staff, and patients.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.278 · 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