MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767525202

Videogame developers among “extreme” workers: Are death marches over?

2017· article· en· W2767525202 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueR-libre (Université Téluq) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Economy and Work Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOriginalityWork (physics)Labour lawBusinessCompliance (psychology)Value (mathematics)Supply chainLabour economicsPublic relationsMarketingEconomicsLawPolitical scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The videogame industry is a work environment that is emblematic of O’Carroll’s (2015) encompassing model of a 24/7/365 working time model of flexibility. We use O’Carroll’s model to challenge two myths about videogame developers (VGDs): the long hours of work are in fact unpredictable hours, and flextime HR programs do not allow for real control over working hours.\nDesign/methodology/approach: We use a mixed methods approach (international online survey and 100 Canadian interviews) to analyse the case of VGDs - a different, but similar type of worker to the IT workers analysed by O’Carroll.\nFindings: We can generalize O’Carroll’s model based on the IT case to the VGD case. Based on these two cases, we propose that the rise of project-based work environments is a major explanatory factor of this raising trend in the 24/7/365 model of flexibility.\nResearch limitations/implications: More research examining project based regimes in other sectors and settings is required to generalize further.\nOriginality/value: Though this model can appear to fit the reality of knowledge work in general, it more accurately describes project-based work in creative environments, which is nearly always knowledge work, but the reverse cannot be inferred.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.203 · 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