MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220932336 · doi:10.1002/cjas.1672

It may be urgent, but is it important? A look at how employees evaluate their emails

2022· article· en· W4220932336 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Andre Lanctot, Linda Duxbury

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPersonal Information Management and User Behavior
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationSalience (neuroscience)Knowledge managementPerspective (graphical)StakeholderEmic and eticPsychologyQualitative researchApplied psychologyComputer sciencePublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper presents the results of a study designed to identify the cues employees use to identify an email as important and/or urgent. Taking an emic perspective, a qualitative research methodology is used to analyze interview responses from knowledge workers. Our findings support the notion that employees use strategies similar to those encapsulated in Mitchell et al.’s (1997) operationalization of stakeholder salience when evaluating an email's importance and/or urgency. Results from this study can be used to design email policies to support knowledge worker performance.

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 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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.426
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.008 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l AdministrationSame topicPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorFrench-language works237,207