MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413957657 · doi:10.1080/01402382.2025.2543151

The power of prime ministers: evidence from 21 parliamentary democracies

2025· article· en· W4413957657 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueWest European Politics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policies and Political Economy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrime (order theory)Power (physics)Political sciencePolitical economyPrime ministerPoliticsPublic administrationEconomicsLawPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research note assesses the extent to which 21st-century prime ministers exert power to influence policy adoption and implementation. Additionally, it examines executive centralisation by analysing prime ministers’ authority to hire and fire ministers, their governing style, tolerance of backbench critique, and control over their parliamentary party. The findings are based on an expert survey on prime ministerial power across 21 parliamentary democracies (Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom), updating an earlier study. The dataset enables testing of theories of increasing prime ministerial power and centralisation, particularly trends towards presidentialisation and prime ministerialisation.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.210 · 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