MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159418835 · doi:10.1111/hequ.12329

Reconceptualizing the phenomenon of inbreeding: Labour markets, stratification, and capital

2021· article· en· W3159418835 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

VenueHigher Education Quarterly · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInbreedingPhenomenonEconomicsSocial stratificationCapital (architecture)Inbreeding depressionStratification (seeds)SociologySocial capitalLabour economicsDemographic economicsBiologyGeographySocial sciencePopulationEpistemologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper illuminates how three distinct but complementary concepts can be used to explain the prevalence of inbreeding in some contexts and the absence or limited frequency of inbreeding in others. The concepts of internal and external labour markets can be useful in understanding the academic labour market conditions that may support or discourage inbreeding. The concepts of vertical fragmentation of the academic labour within universities and the vertical stratification of institutions within systems can be helpful in understanding why inbreeding may be more prevalent for some categories of academic labour, located within specific institutional contexts, than others. Finally, the concepts of social and cultural capital can be useful in understanding inbreeding in terms of academic hiring decision processes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.280 · 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