The influence of communication on policy implementation: The mediating role of disposition
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
This study explores the influence of two key factors, namely communication and disposition, on policy implementation in the educational environment. The main objective of the research is to investigate the impact of communication and disposition on policy implementation, with a specific emphasis on the moderating role of disposition in the relationship between communication and policy implementation. The method used in this research is partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM), analysing data from 232 research samples obtained from nine schools in Indonesia. The research results indicate that communication has a significant and positive influence on policy implementation, while disposition also has a significant and positive impact on policy implementation. A more interesting finding is that disposition, in the context of this research, proves to play a crucial role as a moderating variable, enhancing the positive influence between communication and policy implementation. This finding contributes significantly to our understanding of the complexity of factors influencing policy implementation in the educational environment, particularly from the interaction perspective between communication and disposition. The implications of this research can form the basis for the formulation of more effective and contextual policy strategies in the future.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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