A Look at a Bigger Picture: The Demographic Profile of Archivists in Canada based on a National Survey*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is a report of the results of a national survey of members ofthe Association of Canadian Archivists undertaken in 1998. Following the method of Salant and Dillman for mail surveys, a high response of seventy per cent provides anaccurate picture. The demographic profile of archivists that is discussed is based on returns from all provinces and territories. Frequency tables are provided. The resultsunderscore the value of surveys and point to the profession’s need for regular data collection to keep its knowledge up-to-date and to control the ways professional characteristics and needs are represented in professional and institutional initiatives. RÉSUMÉ Cet article présente les résultats d’un sondage national effectué en 1998 au près des membres de l’Association of Canadian Archivists. Selon la méthode de Salant et Dillman pour la tenue de sondages postaux, un taux élevé de soixante-dix pourcent permet de dresser un portrait fidèle de la situation. Le profil démographique quiest présenté ici découle des questionnaires retournés de toutes les provinces et territoires. Des tableaux de fréquences sont offerts dans l’article. Les résultats obtenusdémontrent la valeur des sondages et indiquent le besoin de la profession quant à lacollecte régulière de données; cela permet de conserver les connaissances à jour surcette profession et de contrôler la façon dont ses traits et besoins sont représentés dans le cadre d’initiatives professionnelles et institutionnelles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".