MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Systematic Review of the Use of Social Media as a Recruitment Tool on the Social Ethical and Privacy Context

2020· review· en· W3000137490 on OpenAlexaff
Ghadah Althawwad

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in e-business research series · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployer Branding and e-HRM
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaEthical issuesExploratory researchEngineering ethicsContext (archaeology)PsychologyPublic relationsSociologyInternet privacyPolitical scienceSocial scienceEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of social media such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter plays an increasingly influential role in the daily lives of people. Despite the rise of interest in this topic, the research discussing the ethical concerns of using social media for recruitment purposes remains in exploratory stages. This chapter provides a systematic review of recent research that was published from 2012 to 2018 and focused on ethical issues related to the use of social media for recruitment purposes. The techno-ethical lens, which studies the impact of technology on ethics, was used to explore the social and ethical aspects of how recruiters use social media for recruitment purposes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.299
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.143 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in e-business research seriesSame topicEmployer Branding and e-HRMFrench-language works237,207