Multi-level analysis of institutional formation and change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the multi-level mechanisms of institutional formation and change and, in particular, how this occurs through the interplay of multi-level mechanisms? This is answered with a processual analysis of the International Paralympic Committee which is the international governing body of sports for people with an impairment. Design/methodology/approach This study uses a case-study approach based upon archival records, collected in relevant national and international sport organizations. More than 2,700 pages of archives were gathered, some of them being accessible to researchers for the first time. Embargo was also successfully lifted on recent and sensitive documents. Findings This study highlights multi-level mechanisms involved in institutional change processes triggered by a shifting institutional logic at the organizational field level. This paper also shows how field logic shifted at the moment of alignment between the societal, field and organizational levels. Moreover, it underlines how societal discourses influenced processes of institutional change by shaping the range of organizational actions available at the organizational and field levels. Originality/value This paper proposes a rare account of institutional change processes in which interplay between the societal, field, and organizational levels is analyzed. Furthermore, this paper provides a longitudinal investigation of an under-researched empirical setting, the Paralympic movement. Finally, this study integrates insights from the disability studies’ research field, which significantly deepens this analysis.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".