MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W83455642 · doi:10.17705/1cais.01709

ICIS Panel Summary: Should Institutional Trust Matter in Information Systems Research?

2006· article· en· W83455642 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications of the Association for Information Systems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Government and Public Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLas vegasPanel discussionPerspective (graphical)Library scienceState (computer science)Political scienceSociologyManagementComputer scienceBusinessLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper summarizes and expands the panel on "Should Institutional Trust Matter in Information Systems Research?" that was presented during the ICIS 2005 Conference in Las Vegas. The panel was co-chaired by Paul A. Pavlou of the University of California and by David Gefen of Drexel University. The panelists were Izak Benbasat of the University of British Columbia, Harrison McKnight of Michigan State University, Katherine Stewart of the University of Maryland, and Detmar W. Straub of Georgia State University. There were about 150 people attending the panel and taking part in the lively discussion that pursued. Due to the interest the panel aroused, this paper expands on the topics discussed and presents them in a much broader perspective in a set of appendices.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.242 · 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