MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101613677 · doi:10.1108/jaoc-08-2020-0104

Accounting for the unaccountable – coping with COVID

2020· article· en· W3101613677 on OpenAlexaff
Steven E. Salterio

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Accounting & Organizational Change · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountabilityAccountingOriginalityExtant taxonPandemicCoping (psychology)Political scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Value (mathematics)Accounting researchEconomicsPublic relationsPsychologyLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to understand what are the best projections of these events effects on organizations and economies. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic leads to a combination of economic and public health circumstances that challenge the accounting for and accountability of organizations that are mostly outside of their experience and that of academics for the past 50 years. Design/methodology/approach Through evidence-based policymaking research, evaluation and reporting tools the author draws on the extant research literature to develop estimates of likely effects of these events on organizations and economies. Findings The process of investigating this subject led the author to write a short research synthesis paper (Salterio 2020a) that summarized the historical economic evidence about the Spanish flu of 1918–1920 and various simulations of potential pandemic macroeconomic effects. This evidence allowed the author to quantify the potential effects of the crisis less than a month into the North American economic shutdown. Originality/value Using that research synthesis the author responded to the call for papers for this special issue by reflecting on the lessons that this crisis has for managers and organizations from both an accountability and accounting 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Accounting & Organizational ChangeSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207