MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

IO psychology as gatekeeper of power and privilege: A critical analysis and call to action

2023· article· en· W4385218734 on OpenAlexaff
Tanya Bilsbury, Lucie Kocum, Shripad G. Pendse

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamStatus quoCall to actionHarmPublic relationsPower (physics)Privilege (computing)Industrial and organizational psychologySociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyEngineering ethicsSocial psychologyLawEngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this critical review, we present mainstream Industrial-Organizational (I-O) psychology as a gatekeeper of status quo power structures in society, and in academic and organizational settings. The persistent marginalization by mainstream I-O psychology of topics of concern to non-able-bodied white workers has caused tremendous human harm over the past century, and presents a major challenge for I-O psychology to support organizations to respond in an evidence-based way to the recent resurgence in public demand for social justice accountability in all spheres, including workplaces. Inspired by health research leaders in knowledge translation, we end by proposing a First-Voice-informed integrated knowledge translation framework for applying EDIA research to practice.

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)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0080.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.039
Scholarly communication0.0130.023
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0090.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.417 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207