Ideas and Institutions in Social Policy Research
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This special issue commemorates the 50th anniversary of Social Policy & Administration. Much has been written over the last two decades about the role of ideas in social policy, especially as they relate to institutions. For instance, a decade ago in this journal, I published a now widely cited article titled ‘Ideas and social policy: An institutionalist perspective’ . The present contribution returns to some of the issues raised in that 2005 article, while assessing the recent ideational scholarship, with the goal of formulating a new research agenda for scholars in the field. Special attention is paid to the need for clear analytical distinctions and rigorous empirical analysis to study the explanatory role of ideas in social policy change, as they may interact with institutions. This article concludes with a discussion about the meaning of institutionalism in ideational analysis and how to concretely explore the interaction between ideas and institutions in the study of social policy stability and change.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it