“No dig, No Ride”: The Communicative Constitution and Consequences of Imperfect Authoritative Texts in Fluid Collective Organizing
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing upon the theoretical roots of Montreal school communicative constitution of organizing (CCO), this study extends the notion of “authoritative texts” (Kuhn, 2008) to loose, emergent, and fluid forms of organizing. Based on interviews and observations among a fluid collective of bicyclists that maintain a public jump course, findings show how repetitive stories and labor analogies are communicative elements giving rise to an authoritative text, that, although imperfect in many ways, exerts influence on organizing practices. Despite lacking conventional organizational structures, the article demonstrates how the emergence and disciplining function of authoritative texts is made possible by a unique form of indirect assertive speech acts. This work contributes to organizational communication theory by extending authoritative text research to fluid organizing, theorizing differences in the coorientation and scaling up processes forming authoritative texts, and providing precise explanations of how texts discipline through intertextual relations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it