MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416233292 · doi:10.1177/08933189251395078

Show, Don’t Tell and Try Me if You Dare! The Body’s Authoritative Force in Traditional Chinese Martial Arts Organizations

2025· article· en· W4416233292 on OpenAlexaff
Chendan Cui-Laughton, Boris H. J. M. Brummans, François Cooren

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Communication Quarterly · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMartial Arts: Techniques, Psychology, and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMartial artsEmbodied cognitionLegitimacyConstitutionEthnographySociocultural evolutionGlobalization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What role do body practices play in the communicative accomplishment of authority in traditional Chinese martial arts organizations (TCMAOs)? This article develops the concept of differential authority, building on Fei Xiaotong’s theory of chaxugeju (differential mode of association), to extend communicative constitution of organizations (CCO) research on authority. Differential authority highlights how instructors demonstrate affiliation with authoritative figures through embodied instruction—especially master demo and testing touch—thereby establishing legitimacy as lineage vectors. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork at a TCMAO in Zhengzhou, China, this study shows how authority is performed, transmitted, and recognized through corporeal, relational practices. Findings reveal the co-constitutive relationship between individual and organizational authority, and the role of embodied instruction in knowledge transfer and continuity. This research situates authority within a culturally specific framework and expands CCO theorizing beyond Western, credential-based models. It opens new directions for examining body-based authority across sociocultural contexts, especially amid globalization and digital mediation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Communication QuarterlySame topicMartial Arts: Techniques, Psychology, and EducationFrench-language works237,207