The interactive effects of policies: Insights for policy feedback theory from a qualitative study on homelessness
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
Abstract The policy feedback literature has long argued that policies influence politics. Several scholars have examined the interpretive and resource effects of policies on political participation. However, how different policy design characteristics – say their generosity and their delivery – interact to influence political engagement requires further attention. This article demonstrates that policy characteristics within and between policies interact and can have counteracting or complementary effects on engagement. Through a comparative study of homelessness in Melbourne, Australia and Toronto, Canada, and drawing on over 100 interviews with individuals experiencing homelessness, service providers, and policymakers, this article demonstrates the complex effects of policies. Qualitative interview data reveal that different characteristics of policy interact to influence the venue and form of participation, as well as the experiences associated. Anatomizing policies provides nuance to our understanding of effects and interactions with important contributions and areas of future research for policy feedback theory.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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