The Interpellated Voice: The Social Discipline of Member Communication
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acknowledging that the voices of ordinary members may be perceived as more credible than official organizational voices, many organizations seek to mobilize members to speak on their behalf. In this conceptual paper, we examine the constitutive dynamics of such practice, highlighting the influence of social discipline on member voicing. With its notion of ventriloquism, the Montreal School has provided an interesting understanding of how organizations are constituted by the voices ascribed to them. Extant formulations of this perspective, however, fail to conceptualize how member voicing is informed and disciplined by social norms and expectations. Drawing on the notions of interpellation and role, we question how “organizational” organizational communication is and what is being constituted when members voice their organizations. By foregrounding the significance of social figures in this process, we call for an extension of the ventriloqual perspective beyond its current organization-centric perspective.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 it