MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2762617650 · doi:10.1353/vpr.2017.0044

The RSVP Bibliography: "A Cooperative Effort" Since 1968

2017· article· en· W2762617650 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mercedes Sheldon

Notice bibliographique

RevueVictorian periodicals review · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueIrish and British Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNoticeTheme (computing)HistoryJournalismMedia studiesLibrary scienceSociologyLawPolitical scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The RSVP Bibliography:"A Cooperative Effort" Since 1968 Mercedes Sheldon (bio) Editorial Comment: We invite others to send us other fugitive bibliographical items which may have escaped the notice of VPN readers.1 As Michael Woolf's editorial call for "fugitive bibliographic items" suggests, the Research Society for Victorian Periodicals from its earliest days was focused on expanding scholarly understanding of Victorian journalism and promoting research about the periodical press. As the 2016 RSVP conference theme reminded us, the search for fugitive items on both fronts has become "bigger and better" with each progressive year. During the society's early years, there were a number of important bibliographical projects. In the second number of Victorian Periodicals Newsletter, issued in June 1968, Lionel Madden laid out his scheme for a "Bibliography of Writings about Victorian Periodicals" (figure 1). He noted that the publication of VPN had encouraged the Victorian Studies Centre at the University of Leicester "to proceed with an additional project to document the literature about Victorian periodicals," and he welcomed "offers of cooperation from all sources, so that an efficient bibliography [could] be compiled and made available as quickly as possible."2 Researchers Henry and Sheila Rosenberg joined Madden in the early work of grappling with this daunting task. At the end of their progress report in the November 1968 issue of VPN, they echo Madden's earlier request for community contributions: "It is clear that the comprehensiveness of this work will depend largely upon the cooperation which can be offered by all who are interested in this project. We should be grateful for any offers of help from readers of VPN."3 In 1970, as work on the first bibliography [End Page 650] was underway, J. Don Vann repeated the call for the full RSVP community to participate in the search for relevant scholarship, noting that the "project of putting together an annual list [was] beyond the energies of one bibliographer" and that producing "anything approaching a comprehensive list [would require] a cooperative effort."4 This request speaks to the historical and ongoing cultural norm of RSVP, for, as Vann points out, the "thrust of RSVP and VPN is cooperative."5 From its inception, the ever-expanding bibliography has been a resource that is a product of the entire RSVP community. Over the past fifty years, nine scholars have served in the role of RSVP bibliographer:6 • J. Don Vann edited the "Checklist of Criticism" for 1971–72 and the annual "Checklist of Scholarship and Criticism" between 1973 and 1977. • Larry K. Uffelman edited the "Checklist of Scholarship and Criticism" for each year between 1978 (when VPN became VPR) and 1986. He also reframed the scope of the project.7 • Bruce White edited the renamed "Annotated Bibliography" for each year between 1987 and 1990. • Cheryl Cassidy edited the "Annotated Bibliography" between 1991 and 1994.8 • Anne Hutchinson Lundin edited the 1993 "Annotated Bibliography," which appeared in the spring 1996 number of VPR. • Solveig Robinson edited the renamed "RSVP Bibliography" beginning with the 1994–97 edition. She then edited biannual editions between 1998 and 2005. • Alexis Easley edited the "RSVP Bibliography" between 2005 and 2010. • Katherine Malone edited the "RSVP Bibliography" between 2011 and 2016. • Ann Hale is currently at work on the next "RSVP Bibliography." Each of these editors coordinated the work of a specific group of participating scholars when identifying, reviewing, cataloging, and categorizing the content of each bibliography. Many of the RSVP bibliographers listed above first worked as apprentices before being appointed to serve as team leader.9 Although he did not serve in an official capacity as RSVP bibliographer, Philip J. Landon of the University of Maryland played a foundational role in the emergence of the field of periodicals research. His bibliography, "Research in Victorian Periodicals: A Checklist of Doctoral Dissertations in the U.S., 1921–67," appeared in the September 1969 number of VPN. This checklist was his "attempt to consolidate and classify those American doctoral dissertations which might prove useful to scholars interested in Victorian periodicals and newspapers."10 A perusal of the checklist reveals the dissertation titles of several RSVP notables: [End Page 651] • Josef L. Altholz, "The Liberal Catholic Movement in...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Communication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,365
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0110,002
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,351
Écart entre enseignants0,326 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueVictorian periodicals reviewMême sujetIrish and British StudiesTravaux en français237 207