MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Toward an Integrative Nomological Network of Congruence: Time to Break New Ground?

2019· article· en· W2964529601 on OpenAlexaff
Yongheng Yao, Zhenzhong Ma

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCongruence (geometry)Nomological networkEmpirical researchComputer sciencePsychologyMathematicsSocial psychologyStatisticsMachine learningStructural equation modeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Congruence research has progressed from the difference score (D) model to the X-Y polynomial regression & response surface methodology (XYPR&RSM) model. Both models, however, are still insufficient to support a comprehensive nomological network of congruence; nor are they as methodologically rigorous as expected. In this article, we develop a difference and mean (D-M) approach to synthesize these two existing models. The proposed D-M model advances congruence research by integrating the effects of the difference (i.e., defined as the signed difference between two constructs), the effects of the mean (i.e., representing the absolute level of the two components), and the difference-and-mean interaction to form a comprehensive nomological network of congruence. The D-M model can help scholars develop more robust theories, offer accurate solutions to address research questions of interest to the XYPR&RSM model, enable knowledge-accumulation in congruence research, and resolve the empirical issues associated with existing models. We then elaborate the contributions of this new model using empirical examples. The results of this study suggest that although previous models both have made important contributions to the literature, it may be the time to explore a new line of research, and research opportunities on the new D-M model have yet to be discovered.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.237 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207