MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125959057 · doi:10.1177/0022185609353981

Framing Globalization and Work: A Research Agenda

2010· article· en· W2125959057 on OpenAlexaff
Gregor Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Industrial Relations · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)GlobalizationSociologyPolitical economyPolitical scienceInternationalizationEconomic systemNormativeCapitalismSocial changeEconomicsLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on vignettes of the contested nature of change at work in a context of globalization, this article presents four contending narratives of this relationship. It argues that such frames open up or close down the possibility for actors to envisage the evolution of work and employment. The first two (overdetermined convergence and the crisis of capitalism) limit our understanding of important features of the processes underway. A third (balancing the economic and the social) opens up more space for varied outcomes and social choices, but is faulted for its problematical assumptions about social engineering and institutional trade-offs. A fourth frame focused on actor capacity and power offers the most interesting analytical avenues for the development of research. Four consequences are envisaged for the development of a research agenda: first, a focus on four types of fault line of deep societal change (internationalization of economic relations, the reorganization of production, the gender contract and decent, socially useful and healthy work) and the intersections of these fault lines; second, identifying and tracking the articulations and hierarchies between sources and sites of social regulation; third, studying the decline and revitalization of existing actors and the emergence of new actors and their capacities and power; finally, making research on work and employment matter through values, a proximity to social actors and a normative dialogue with change.

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)0.003
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 score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.604

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueJournal of Industrial RelationsSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207