MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271064076 · doi:10.1177/0018726715579523

Inequality, corporate legitimacy and the Occupy Wall Street movement

2015· article· en· W2271064076 on OpenAlex
Paul Shrivastava, Olga Ivanova

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

VenueHuman Relations · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegitimacyLegitimationContext (archaeology)Movement (music)Political scienceSociologyInequalityOrder (exchange)Public relationsSensemakingPolitical economyAestheticsBusinessLawHistoryPoliticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This exploratory study examines legitimacy challenges to business spawned by growing inequalities. It uses aesthetic inquiry in the context of the Occupy Wall Street movement to understand the processes of organizational legitimation and delegitimation. By studying photos of slogans and placards from the Occupy Wall Street movement, we show how corporate and business legitimacy are challenged by the public. We identify different types of legitimacy challenges across organizational systems’ levels. We explore implications of these challenges for corporations and the use of aesthetic strategies as delegitimation signals by Occupy Wall Street protesters in order to express their support or discontent with existing norms, values and standards.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.584
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.174 · 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