MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096883547 · doi:10.24124/c677/20151204

Public, Private, and Non-profit Sector Employees: Voting Behaviour and Ideology in the 2011-2012 Provincial Elections

2015· article· en· W2096883547 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrea Rounce, Karine Levasseur

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Political Science Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVotingIdeologyPublic sectorPrivate sectorPoliticsBiology and political orientationVariablesDiversity (politics)Public administrationEconomicsPolitical sciencePublic economicsSociologyPublic relationsEconomic growthEconomyLawMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses attention on the political orientation and civic behaviour of people working in the non-profit, private, and public sectors. While considerable research has been completed to understand how variables such as age and gender influence voting patterns, one variable that remains understudied is employment by sector. To develop hypothesis statements for this research, this paper begins with the Bureau Voting Model which is rooted in rational choice theory. The hypothesis statements are tested using data from the SSHRC-funded Canadian Provincial Election Project (CPEP) Survey, conducted post-provincial election in 2011-2012 in eight provinces. The paper concludes that while there were diverging orientations amongst employees in the three sectors, there were also some areas of convergence to suggest that there may be substantial diversity within each sector.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Political Science ReviewSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207