MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307510957 · doi:10.1177/01708406221137840

Temporal Structuring as Self-Discipline: Managing time in the budgeting process

2022· article· en· W4307510957 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ferdinand Kunzl, Martin Messner

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganization Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHEC MontréalQueen's UniversityUniversity of BristolUniversity of Technology SydneyAustrian Science FundQueen's University BelfastYork UniversityCopenhagen Business School
KeywordsStructuringProcess (computing)Entrainment (biomusicology)Plan (archaeology)Norm (philosophy)Mode (computer interface)Computer scienceProcess managementSociologyBusinessPolitical scienceHuman–computer interactionLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

so as to achieve entrainment of a practice to temporal norms. Temporal self-discipline is about imposing self-created temporal structures on one's future behaviour and goes along with the (re-)production of a time-conscious self. Based on our fieldwork, we show how such self-discipline materializes both in the form of a very detailed temporal plan and in spaces for coordination to ensure sticking to this plan. We demonstrate that practising temporal self-discipline provides accountants with a sense of control over the budgeting process - a way to achieve 'controlled' entrainment to the temporal norm. We also show how temporal disruptions may challenge controlled entrainment, forcing actors into a passive mode of reaction and potential deviation from their intended plan.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.015
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.231 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganization StudiesSame topicManagement and Organizational StudiesFrench-language works237,207