MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3152852617 · doi:10.4018/jgim.2021050109

Using Panel Data Analysis to Uncover Drivers of E-Participation Progress

2021· article· en· W3152852617 on OpenAlexaff
Princely Ifinedo, Amar Anwar, Danny I. Cho

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Information Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Government and Public Services
Canadian institutionsCape Breton UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPer capitaAccountabilityPanel dataCorporate governanceLanguage changeInformation and Communications TechnologyRule of lawFixed effects modelGovernment (linguistics)Gross domestic productQuality (philosophy)Regression analysisPer capita incomeEconomicsBusinessEconomic growthDemographic economicsPoliticsPolitical scienceEconometricsFinanceSociologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines and uncovers the key drivers of e-participation progress or growth over the years, globally and regionally. The authors used fixed-effects regression model on a panel data of variables gathered by reputable world organizations for an 8-year period – one of the largest examined to date. They tested a research model including GDP per capita, ICT infrastructure, secondary education enrolment, technological knowledge creation and outputs, and six governance indicators: voice and accountability, political stability, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law, and control of corruption. At the global level, the results indicate that e-participation progress is positively influenced by voice and accountability, GDP per capita, and ICT infrastructure. Analyses based upon six geographical regions of the world and countries' income-level classifications (i.e., low, low-middle, high-middle, high) show that determinants of e-participation progress vary by geographical and income-level contexts.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global Information ManagementSame topicE-Government and Public ServicesFrench-language works237,207