MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144661023 · doi:10.1177/2041386613498765

Squires

2013· article· en· W2144661023 on OpenAlex
J. Mark Weber, Celia Moore

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganizational Psychology Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFollowershipConformityCharismaSocial psychologyCharismatic authorityPsychologyPower (physics)EpistemologySociologySocial loafingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on several theoretical traditions in the social sciences, we offer a theory of the social facilitation of charismatic leadership by introducing the concept of squires. Squires are key followers who serve four social facilitation functions: liberating and legitimizing, modeling, buffering, and interpreting and translating. Liberating and legitimizing builds on social conformity research. Modeling is based in the social learning and social influence literatures. Buffering, and interpreting and translating, draw on insights from the psychology of power and organizational theory. These functions help resolve two central charismatic leadership paradoxes: (a) the need to be different from followers, though followers prefer to be led by leaders who are like them, and (b) the need to be personally inspiring to followers while being socially distant from them. In specifying squires’ functions, we also address three weaknesses in conceptions of followership and contribute to understandings of how charismatic leadership emerges, works, and endures.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.026

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.255 · 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