MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139584592 · doi:10.1002/cjas.74

“I'd like to thank the academy”: An analysis of the awards discourse at the Atlantic Schools of Business Conference

2008· article· en· W2139584592 on OpenAlex
Patricia Genoe McLaren, Albert J. Mills

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReputationLegitimacyDiscourse analysisSociologyPolitical scienceCritical discourse analysisMedia studiesLinguisticsSocial scienceLawIdeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The awarding of prizes has become embedded in all aspects of our society, including academic conferences. At the same time, the reputation economy, an economy where individual standing is based on the opinions of end users, is growing in strength and validity. We analyzed the way in which the awards discourse has been recontextualized within a small academic conference that is struggling to find legitimacy—the Atlantic Schools of Business Conference. With a focus on language and the different meanings words hold in different discourses, we have determined that recontextualization of the discourse within the conference has resulted in two distinct discourses—the discourse of the award giving body and the discourse of the potential award recipient. Copyright © 2008 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.019
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.206 · 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