MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115128905 · doi:10.1177/0276146720981718

A Macromarketing Call to Action—Because Black Lives Matter!

2020· article· en· W3115128905 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Macromarketing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicConsumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMacromarketingRacismScholarshipTransformative learningAction (physics)Call to actionSociologyPublic relationsMarketing ethicsMarketingPolitical scienceBusiness ethicsBusinessLawGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay poses the question do Black Lives Matter to marketing? Putting the spotlight on research in marketing reveals the multiple ways in which the field has neglected a most pressing issue of our time—structural and systemic anti-Black racism. The global rallying cry in the Black Lives Matter protests alerts us to the urgency for transformative change in all spheres including the marketing academy. Macromarketing is particularly poised to lead this change given the commitment to justice in marketing systems and concerns with the bilateral impact of marketing on society. This essay issues a call to action to re-historize the role of transatlantic slavery, for researchers to be reflective in addressing systemic racism, and for the academy to adopt anti-racist strategies to propel this scholarship from the periphery of marketing thought to its core.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.224 · 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