Managing the Dilemma of Disclosure in Corporate Political Activity (WITHDRAWN)
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
Through a longitudinal study of the macro-level formulation and organizational-level implementation of EU-level lobbying regulation. I explore what happens when lobbyists – accustomed to working in policymaking and organizational settings where covert political practices historically prevail – face new, institutional pressures to exhibit greater transparency in their work. I contribute to open-strategy literature by identifying multi-level, multi-faceted practices enacted to manage the dilemma of disclosure in the context of CPA. I also reveal societal implications and 'dark sides' of open strategy. At a purely organizational-level, lobbyists could be viewed positively as carriers of broad normative pressures, with potential to open up CPA to closer external scrutiny. Considered more critically, lobbyists’ efforts at promoting transparent practices at a higher macro-level appear to be driven by self-serving, instrumental benefits – such as improved occupational reputation, and political access – rather than pro-social motivations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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