MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Does Country Equal Culture? Beyond Geography in the Search for Cultural Entities

2014· article· en· W2327547679 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

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Cultural Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHofstede's cultural dimensions theoryGlobalizationPoliticsVariation (astronomy)EquatingCultural economicsProxy (statistics)Economic freedomCultural diversityEconomic geographySociologyDevelopment economicsSocial sciencePolitical scienceGeographyEconomicsAnthropologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally, cultures have been seen to reside within countries. The terms “country” and “culture” are often used interchangeably. As evidence of substantial within-country variation in cultural values mounts, the problem with equating country and culture becomes obvious. Based on a meta- analysis of 558 studies that utilized Hofstede’s (1980) model of culture, we evaluate the extent to which political boundaries are suitable for clustering cultures. The results reveal that about eighty percent of variation in cultural values resides within countries, confirming that country is a not a good proxy for culture. The role of other individual and environment characteristics, such as occupation, socio-economic status, wealth, freedom, globalization and instability is also evaluated. The results suggest that it may be more meaningful to talk about cultures of professions, socio-economic classes, rich versus poor and free versus oppressed societies than about cultures of countries.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.297 · 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