Bibliographic record
Abstract
Citation (2016), "Editorial Board", Contemporary Issues in Applied and Professional Ethics (Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations, Vol. 15), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. ix-x. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1529-209620160000015013 Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited Copyright © 2016 Emerald Group Publishing Limited Joseph L. Badaracco, Jr. Harvard University, USA Ida Berger Ryerson University, Canada Norman Bowie University of Minnesota, USA M. Neil Browne The Aspen Institute, USA Debra R. Comer Hofstra University New York, USA Wesley Cragg York University, Canada Ron Duska The American College, USA Georges Enderle University of Notre Dame, France Edwin Epstein University of California at Berkeley, USA Amitai Etzioni George Washington University, USA William Frederick University of Pittsburg, USA Al Gini Loyola University Chicago, USA Kenneth E. Goodpaster University of St. Thomas, USA Ellen McCorkle Harshman St. Louis University, USA Laura Pincus Hartman DePaul University, USA Daryl Koehn University of St. Thomas Minneapolis, USA Kimball R. Marshall Jackson State University, USA E. Sharon Mason Brock University, Canada Douglas McCabe Georgetown University, USA Alex Michalos University of Northern British Columbia, Canada Barry Mitnick University of Texas at Austin, USA Moses Pava Yeshiva University, USA Mark S. Schwartz York University, Canada Meir Tamari Jerusalem Institute of Technology, Israel Steven Wartick University of Missouri-St. Louis, USA Book Chapters Contemporary Issues in Applied and Professional Ethics Research in Ethical Issues in Organizations Contemporary Issues in Applied and Professional Ethics Copyright Page List of Contributors Editorial Board Introduction Supply and Demand in the Development of Professional Ethics How Should the Concept of a Profession Be Understood, and Is the Notion of a Practice Helpful in Understanding It? Transformation: An Examination of the Virtuous Character from the Perspective of Process Philosophy Model Litigant Guidelines – Current and Emerging Issues Local Action, Global Shame Posthumous Donation and Consent Altruism and Generosity in Surrogate Motherhood Contemporary Issues in the Professionalisation of Child Care in Australia Measuring Ethical and Empirical Consequences of De-Institutionalisation Risky Business – The Ethics of Judging Individuals Based on Group Statistics About the Authors
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.291 | 0.300 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".