PROXY SEDUCTION FRAMEWORK

Research Hub

Central workspace for the PSF empirical phase. Cards below track research design instruments, fieldwork materials, coding rubrics, data, and analyses. Each card links to a standalone file (HTML or Markdown) that can be opened independently. Placeholder cards mark tools that will be built as the research progresses.

Target: ~50 semi-structured interviews Population: 30-35 frontline, 15-20 boundary activity Primary domain: software development Phase: Pre-fieldwork (design and recruitment)
PSF Theory Hub →
01 Research Design 3 tools
DESIGN
Interview Protocol 2x2
Semi-structured interview questions organized by a consequence-exposure x engagement-depth matrix. Four cells (Cell 4 structurally empty). Each cell has a practitioner profile, tailored questions, and "listening for" annotations. Cross-cutting probe on friction episodes. Sequencing notes: Cell 2 first to establish pre-engagement vocabulary baseline.
4 cells Cross-cutting probe Sequencing rationale
Active
DESIGN
Dumbbell Coding Rubrics
Four paired-measure specifications for coding interview transcripts into dumbbell chart visualizations. Pairing 1: self-assessed improvement vs. criteria articulation depth. Pairing 2: proxy vocabulary ratio vs. consequence vocabulary ratio. Pairing 3: friction episode count vs. confidence rating. Pairing 4: reported team metric vs. boundary performer's actual monitor. Includes coding workflow, inter-rater protocol, and JSON output format.
4 pairings 1-5 rating scales Vocabulary taxonomy JSON spec
Active
DESIGN
Empirical Phase Checklist
Progressive Web App covering the 11 elements of the PSF empirical design, broken into 47 sub-questions. Tracks readiness across interview protocol, recruitment, ethics, analysis framework, and domain coverage. Originally on the Theory Hub, migrated here as an empirical-phase instrument.
11 elements 47 sub-questions PWA
Active
02 Fieldwork 3 tools
FIELDWORK
Candidate Tracker
Pipeline for managing the ~50 interview participants. Categories: senior developers (10-12), mid-career (8-10), junior (8-10), open source maintainers (3-5), design leads (4-5), engineering managers (4-5), DevEx/DevRel (5-6), product managers (2-3). Tracks status (confirmed, invited, prospect, referred), cell assignment, and sourcing channel.
~50 interviews 8 role categories Snowball sampling
Draft (Markdown)
FIELDWORK
Discourse Traps of Proxy Seduction
Field diagnostic for identifying how practitioner discourse naturalizes evaluative erosion. Eight observed traps (inductively derived) and six hypothesized traps (deductively predicted from PSF). Each trap includes the discourse move, PSF counter-question, and observable indicators. Use for interview prep and real-time field note coding. Also on the Theory Hub.
8 observed + 6 hypothesized Interview prep Field note coding
Active
FIELDWORK
Interview Data Repository
Centralized store for transcripts, field memos, and post-interview coding sheets. Each interview produces a transcript, a 200-word first-pass memo, and coded scores for all four rubric pairings. Will link to individual transcript pages as interviews are completed.
Transcripts Memos Coded scores
Planned
03 Analysis 3 tools
ANALYSIS
Transcript Analysis Framework
Three-pass coding workflow. Pass 1: holistic memo within 48 hours. Pass 2: rubric scoring (Pairings 1 and 3). Pass 3: vocabulary extraction and classification (Pairing 2). Inter-rater reliability protocol after every 10 interviews. Codebook will evolve iteratively as patterns emerge.
3-pass coding Inter-rater protocol Iterative codebook
Planned
ANALYSIS
Cross-case Pattern Tables
Within-cell and cross-cell comparison tables following Miles, Huberman and Saldana (2020). Will organize patterns by 2x2 cell, testing whether PSF predictions hold within each population (Cell 1 widest gaps, Cell 2 narrowest, Cell 3 premature arrest signal). Outlier cases flagged for theoretical refinement.
Within-cell patterns Cross-cell comparison Outlier analysis
Planned
ANALYSIS
Boundary Activity Translation Map
Analysis of Pairing 4 data (reported team metric vs. boundary performer's actual monitor). Maps the translation gap across matched teams. Tests whether boundary activity performers hold criteria the frontline has dropped, and whether that holding is visible or invisible to the organization.
Pairing 4 specific Matched teams Translation gap
Planned
04 Outputs 3 tools
OUTPUT
Pairing 1 Dumbbell: SAI vs. CAD (Illustrative)
Interactive dumbbell chart with synthetic data for 40 practitioners demonstrating what the visualization would look like if PSF predictions hold. Sortable by gap magnitude, 2x2 cell, work style (O/P/S), or SAI score. Hover reveals score detail and key quote per practitioner. Summary stat cards by cell. Uses illustrative data only, not from real interviews.
40 synthetic practitioners 4 sort modes Work style dimension Standalone HTML
Active (illustrative)
OUTPUT
Dumbbell Visualization Gallery
Interactive dumbbell charts built from coded interview data. One chart per rubric pairing. Each row is a practitioner, two dots show paired scores, bar reveals the gap. Color-coded by 2x2 cell. Sortable by gap magnitude, cell, seniority. Hover detail shows practitioner ID, scores, and key quote. React component reused from the unicorn density visualization.
4 chart pairings Interactive React/JSX
Planned
OUTPUT
Empirical Findings Report
Synthesis document connecting interview evidence to PSF theoretical predictions. Organized around the five falsification conditions from the AMR paper. Each condition mapped to the relevant 2x2 cells, coding pairings, and pattern tables. Includes confirming evidence, disconfirming evidence, and cases requiring mechanism refinement. Feeds directly into the thesis empirical chapter.
5 falsification conditions Thesis chapter input Mechanism refinement
Planned