Factors Shaping Public Perceptions of Market-based Activities Undertaken by Canadian Nonprofits
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
Abstract Charitable nonprofits are engaging at increasing rates in market-based activities. This study examined Canadian public perception of nonprofits’ market-based activities. Latent variables for trust, financial accountability, transparency, direct and general familiarity, understanding of nonprofit roles in service delivery and advocacy, and orientation towards market-based activities were created using a secondary dataset of nationally representative Canadians (n = 3853). Results show that positive perceptions of market-based activities of nonprofits are influenced by familiarity of nonprofits, accepting their advocacy role, and perceiving them as being accountable. Those with stronger views of nonprofits as providers of direct service had unfavorable perceptions of the nonprofit’s market-based activities. The findings have implications for nonprofit managers who engage in market-based activities and want to promote a positive orientation to these endeavors to engage consumers and investors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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