MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321379299 · doi:10.1177/14761270231152955

Putting categories in their place: A research agenda for theorizing place in category research

2023· article· en· W4321379299 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

VenueStrategic Organization · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMateriality (auditing)SociologyCollective actionMeaning (existential)EpistemologyIdentity (music)Sense of placeAction (physics)Collective identityOrganizational identityPlace attachmentSocial psychologyPsychologyAestheticsSocial sciencePolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing category research tends to divorce categories from place. When considered at all, place is often relegated to the contextual background. We see at least three important elements of place that can inform our understanding of categories: first, categories are rooted in the materiality of place; second, those who inhabit a place often share a collective identity that can impart meaning to categories; third, places influence the collective action that underlies category processes. Accordingly, we call for categories “to be put in their place” in category research, by attending to the materialities, collective identities, and collective action present in place. We present an integrative framework for future research that links place, categories, and organizational outcomes, and suggest mechanisms that link these constructs.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.205 · 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