MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154375028 · doi:10.1177/1049732308327349

On the Line: Worker Democracy and the Struggle Over Occupational Health and Safety

2008· article· en· W2154375028 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kara Granzow, Nancy Théberge

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitizen journalismPublic relationsContext (archaeology)Participatory action researchOccupational safety and healthQualitative researchSociologyParticipatory managementPolitical sciencePsychologySocial psychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we present a qualitative analysis of worker involvement in a participatory project to improve occupational health and safety at a Canadian manufacturing site. Based on interviews with workers in the plant, we consider the manner and degree to which workers experienced meaningful participation in the intervention process and some of the main barriers to worker participation. Findings emphasize the importance of the social and political context in conditioning the dynamics of joint management labor ventures specifically in relation to health initiatives. Interviews revealed few instances in which workers felt included in the participatory initiative; most often they felt marginalized. In the absence of structural change in the plant, workers described the health initiative as seriously limited in its ability to render meaningful worker participation. These results extend beyond this analysis of a participatory workplace health initiative, offering insights into the dynamics of institutional participatory process, and into participatory research practice generally.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Health ResearchSame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207