The Impact of Conducting Research with a First Nation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Cree of northern QuEbec have had eight psychological studies conducted in their territory. They ejected all the researchers except one. From the point of view of the Cree, the problem appears to be one of behaviour of researchers and respect for an autonomous group. This issue was investigated by conducting an experiment with a group of James Bay Cree from northern QuebEc. They were then polled as to their reaction to participating in the research. Insensitively conducted research can put major social stresses on both individuals and the community. Several crucial sources of reactivity were found: rigid protocols, requests for self-disclosure, perceived dishonesty, differential treatment of participants, and lack of redeeming social value of the research. These sources of reactivity suggest guidelines for researchers such as respecting local authority, adapting instruments to the culture, and providing feedback to the participants and the community.
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 | 0.414 | 0.448 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".