MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417310467 · doi:10.1080/17449359.2025.2602684

Organizational violence, memory and trauma

2025· article· en· W4417310467 on OpenAlex
Diego M. Coraiola

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement & Organizational History · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Organizational Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganizational memoryMnemonicConstruct (python library)NegotiationTraumatic memoriesOrganizational studiesMemory workOrganizational learningCollective memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trauma is a persistent form of memory and a response to organizational violence. Yet, research on traumatic memories has been absent from most management journals. In analyzing how organizations manage, interpret, and use the positive aspects of their past to achieve strategic goals, scholars have missed what they willfully forget. Studying organizational violence and trauma requires engaging with the communities and stakeholders affected by their actions. They are the memory keepers of the past that organizations often strive to suppress. Understanding the work of those mnemonic communities founded and transformed by organizational violence requires an analysis of how they construct that experience and negotiate it with perpetrators, cultivate traumatic memories across generations, and engage in processes of healing and reconciliation. Recognizing the memories and claims to the past that organizations attempt to erase can generate new avenues for research in organizational memory studies.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.908
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.169 · 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