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
Much like the social phenomenon which it seeks to explain, institutional theory has become an institutional and dominant theoretical research traditional within sport management.In the context of sport, institutional theory can be used to examine the complex relationship between sport organisations and their broader environment.Specifically, it explains how sport organisations are influenced by and in turn influence, broader social, political and economic forces, as well as how these institutional forces shape the behaviour and practices of athletes, coaches and fans.The five original contributions contained within this special issue seek to advance institutional scholarship and bridge the growing theoretical divide between sport management and management.Taken together, the papers in this special issue represent the potential for not only further illumination of how institutional theory can advance sport management, but also how sport management might hold the possibility for further articulation and advancement of institutional theory.In doing so, we set out a future research agenda that calls for a return to the original motivations and concepts of institutional theory and a further appreciation of the distinctiveness of the sport context for understanding institutional arrangements.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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