MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2342568536 · doi:10.1177/0276146715592929

Appropriation of Community Knowledge

2015· article· en· W2342568536 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Macromarketing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSimon Fraser University
KeywordsAppropriationHarmPublic relationsSubsistence agricultureBusinessKnowledge baseSociologyMarketingPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Base of the Pyramid (BoP) and subsistence marketplaces literature, a general consensus prevails that the process of creating solutions for the poor is most successful when marketers gain a local perspective. This paper highlights that, as companies seek this local perspective within impoverished communities, they can appropriate community knowledge. Drawing on research in the area of community knowledge, an area of growing importance that is all but missing from the marketing literature, this paper explicates key features of community knowledge. Appropriation of community knowledge can have potential benefits to communities, but also can cause social harm, including undermining financial, economic, and cultural safety, in the BoP community. The papers proposes a framework, bridging ethical and legal approaches, that guides marketers to consider consent, cognitive justice, capacity, and community impact in order to mitigate harm and generate social benefits.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.208 · 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