MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225274932 · doi:10.3917/mav.128.0015

La communication de la philanthropie corporative en tant que stratégie de légitimation : une étude du domaine hôtelier

2022· article· fr· W4225274932 on OpenAlex
Élisabeth Robinot, Léo Trespeuch, David Zaragoza Sanchez

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

VenueManagement & Avenir · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette recherche met en évidence que la philanthropie corporative représente un outil influençant la légitimité (Suchman, 1995) de ces entreprises à condition qu’elle crée une fondation privée. Pour ce faire, une étude de cas visant à analyser la communication sur le réseau Twitter d’entreprises hôtelières a été conduite en deux temps. La première analyse quantitative met en lumière que la communication d’actions philanthropiques via les fondations touristiques octroie plus de légitimité que la communication effectuée par les entreprises sans une fondation et un compte Twitter dédié. La seconde étude qualitative permet de comprendre la nature de cette légitimité à savoir qu’une légitimité économique et sociopolitique est partagée par un tissu philanthropique. Ainsi, une tendance vers l’isomorphisme des pratiques apparaît.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient 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 score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.286
Teacher spread0.273 · 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