MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205390764 · doi:10.19070/2643-038x-2100015

Scrutiny of E-Mail Discourse Features in an Organization Using Speech Act Theory

2021· article· en· W4205390764 on OpenAlex
Mitra Madanchian

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

VenueInternational Journal of Finance Economics and Trade · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Communication and Language
Canadian institutionsHog Administrative Marketing Services (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScrutinyInterpersonal communicationRhetorical questionVariety (cybernetics)Order (exchange)PsychologySpeech actBusiness communicationRhetorical devicePublic relationsLinguisticsComputer scienceWorld Wide WebKnowledge managementBusinessSocial psychologyCommunicationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, most business communications and transactions are conducted via Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) and as email is the most familiar type of CMC. In reality email communication plays a vital role in establishing and maintaining business relationships, both within a company and with external contacts. This study investigates features of email discourse in workplace communication. Email exchanges are analyzed in order to clarify how members of an organization interact with each other using emails to achieve specific communicative needs of the organization. The data of this study consist of a corpus of email messages (N=112) which are exchanged among members of a selected Iranian organization and collected over a stipulated period.This study drew on the Speech Act Theory framework as the basis for analyzing and explaining the qualitative data. In addition, data was analysed using Nvivo. Finally, the study concludes that the employees in this Iranian organization adopted a variety of discourse and rhetorical strategies to achieve the specific communicative needs at the workplace. The selected strategies reflect the writer's interpersonal relationship with their email intractants. Finally, the findings clarified the features of email discourse.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.260 · 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