MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327557202 · doi:10.1111/padm.12923

A comparative study of governance changes on the perceptions of accountability in Fire and Rescue Services in England

2023· article· en· W4327557202 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Administration · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTrent UniversityNottingham Trent University
KeywordsAccountabilityCorporate governancePerceptionPublic administrationService (business)Public relationsBusinessPolitical scienceLawMarketingPsychologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Public organizations are increasingly held accountable by multiple institutions and standards. This study explores how key actors perceive accountability changes in Fire and Rescue Services in England. However, few studies have examined perceptions of accountability where long‐established governance arrangements are changing. The UK's Policing and Crime Act 2017 provided for a new model of governance in the form of a single directly elected commissioner to replace the traditional indirectly elected fire authority. This study uses a comparative multiple case study design to understand the impact of the governance arrangements on individuals' perceptions of accountability within each service. It adds to the wider understanding of the influences of institutional structures on individuals' perceptions and actions, and it demonstrates that accountability perceptions change depending on the way public services are governed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.300 · 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