Integration of Digital Technologies in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities: A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis
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
Modern technologies require the need to analyze the opportunities for improving the integration of digital technologies in CSR activities in the context of added values between business and science in perspective, including the future digital society. The main goal of this article is to identify the current state of research on the integration of digital technologies in CSR activities in business, as well as to prepare recommendations for further research and practice. Additionally, the study aims to recognize the relationship and dependencies between CSR and digital technologies. A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis of 129 scientific articles published between 2014 to 2023 was performed. The bibliometric analysis was organized in two directions: descriptive and performance analysis, through which we can study the contribution of the analyzed objects to the given scientific area, and science mapping, which studies the relationships among them. The results indicate that companies more frequently use artificial intelligence, blockchain, the Internet of Things and other technologies to increase the efficiency and impact of their CSR activities. In addition, this research reveals the basis of bringing forward the new trends for future publications, which shall upgrade and enrich the theory and 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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | low |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | high |
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.090 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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