MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899205582 · doi:10.1080/09744053.2018.1538676

Whose perception matters? An analysis of the social construction of Ghana Police Service and the implementation of the Single Spine Pay Policy

2018· article· en· W2899205582 on OpenAlexafffund
A. A. Boasiako Boasiako

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrica Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicTaxation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et Culture
KeywordsSalaryGovernment (linguistics)Service (business)PoliticsState (computer science)Social policyPerceptionPopulationPublic relationsPower (physics)Public administrationPublic economicsEconomicsSociologyPolitical scienceBusinessMarketingLawPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article assesses the social construction of the Ghana Police Service to explain why the government of Ghana assigned pay increase to the personnel of the service in the initial stage of implementation of the Single Spine Pay Policy. Through a diachronic case study design, the article undertakes a content analysis of budget states of Ghana from 2001 to 2016 and shows that despite the widespread negative societal perception of the police service, the GPS remains a positively constructed target population in the eyes of the state. The article argues that this state-driven positive social construction combined with the preponderant political power to make the police service an advantaged target group deserving of the salary increment under the SSPP. The theoretical implications of this dichotomous statesociety social construction for the democratic policy design theory are further explored with a call l for a new research agenda.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrica ReviewSame topicTaxation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207