MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316025066 · doi:10.1177/0160449x14534732

Workplace Empowerment and Disempowerment

2014· article· en· W2316025066 on OpenAlex

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

VenueLabor Studies Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalHEC MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentTypologyPublic relationsContext (archaeology)Control (management)FeelingPolitical sciencePower (physics)Social psychologySociologyPsychologyManagementEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study of workplace union delegates in the education sector identifies a typology of the experience of workplace union representatives according to their assessment of their degree of influence in their workplace and their union and their degree of control over their work as a union representative. When combined, these two assessments yield different types of disempowerment and empowerment. While workplace context plays an important role in delegates’ degree of control, their influence in the workplace and union is strongly associated with different types of power resources (internal and external networks) and strategic capabilities (learning and articulating or bridging). Unions seeking to increase workplace representative influence should therefore look to the reinforcement of delegates’ power resources and strategic capabilities while looking at how to reinforce their ability to deal with more difficult contexts associated with feeling a loss of control.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.317 · 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