MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407539087 · doi:10.1111/polp.70000

Introduction to the Special Issue: Exploring the Policy–Mobilization Nexus: How Policies and Mobilizations Shape One Another

2025· article· en· W4407539087 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Marcos Ancelovici, Joëlle Dussault, Montserrat Emperador Badimon

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitics &amp Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMobilizationNexus (standard)Political sciencePolitical economyResource mobilizationPublic administrationSociologySocial movementComputer scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Although public policies and social mobilizations often shape one another, policy studies and social movement studies have focused on distinct dimensions of the “policy–mobilization nexus.” Such segmented perspectives generate blind spots and partial accounts of both the policy process and social mobilization dynamics. This special issue unpacks the policy–mobilization nexus and brings together papers that analyze the interactions between public policy and protest in different policy domains (family, housing, education, and health) in four countries (Chile, Quebec, Spain, and the United States). It makes three contributions. First, it stresses the contentious nature of the policy‐making process and shows that many social actors combine disruptive and conciliatory modes of action. Second, it challenges standard arguments according to which social movements shape the policy process only indirectly, through agenda‐setting. Finally, it takes temporal dynamics seriously and stresses the need to treat policies not as an output or outcome but as a process with no clear starting and end points.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitics &amp PolicySame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207