MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206621223 · doi:10.1080/08874417.2021.2010150

Understanding Data Analytics Recommendation Execution: The Role of Recommendation Quality

2022· article· en· W4206621223 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 Computer Information Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBig Data and Business Intelligence
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAnalyticsQuality (philosophy)Data qualityRecommender systemConcordanceData scienceSample (material)PerceptionKnowledge managementWorld Wide WebPsychologyBusinessMedicineMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although significantly more organizations have recently invested in Data Analytics (DA), most business users do not execute DA recommendations. Conceptualizing the novel concept of DA recommendation quality, shaped by tool, data and analyst quality, this study draws on the Stimulus-Organism-Response framework to investigate its effect on shaping users’ perceptions of concordance, actionability, and risk, ultimately influencing their DA recommendation execution. The theoretical model is empirically validated using a sample of senior managers across North America. Enriching DA literature, this study shows that DA recommendation quality is positively associated with recommendation execution, while actionability is the dominant factor in increasing it.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.006
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.327
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.009 · 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