MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164686398 · doi:10.1177/0950017013481877

The nature of front-line service work: distinctive features and continuity in the employment relationship

2013· article· en· W2164686398 on OpenAlexaff
Jacques Bélanger, Paul Edwards

Bibliographic record

VenueWork Employment and Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmotional Labor in Professions
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFront lineWork (physics)Service (business)Front (military)SociologyEmpirical researchPublic relationsBusinessPositive economicsMarketingEpistemologyPolitical scienceEconomicsEngineeringLawMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empirical studies increasingly reflect the importance of service work in the economy. This article analyses the implications of this evolution for theories of work and employment. It critically reviews some key notions that are taken for granted in the research literature on service work and elaborates an alternative conceptual model. A deeper understanding of service work is possible only if the worker-customer interaction is conceived as part of the social structure that shapes it, namely the employment relationship. This article throws light on the interconnections between management control and customer demands and suggests that these have a mutually reinforcing effect which puts pressure on employees. It insists on both the distinctive features of front-line service work and the founding principles of the employment relationship that still apply beyond such categories.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations119
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWork Employment and SocietySame topicEmotional Labor in ProfessionsFrench-language works237,207