Les études en communication médiatique au Québec et l'approche des Cultural Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'intention premiere de cet article est d'offrir quelques pistes de recherche qui permettront de reflechir a la circulation limitee des Cultural Studies dans le domaine des etudes universitaires en communication mediatique au Quebec. A partir de son propre cheminement academique, l'auteur explique l'interet qu'il porte aux Cultural Studies et offre une breve description du projet de cette approche. Il propose ensuite un rapide retour historique aux debuts des sciences sociales au Quebec et resume les caracteristiques propres a la fondation des departements de communication. Par ailleurs, apres une breve presentation des premieres voies de la recherche quebecoise sur la culture, notamment des recherches en economie politique sur les industries culturelles, il identifie les premiers travaux quebecois a avoir commente les Cultural Studies. L'auteur met en evidence le phenomene de « l'asynchronie » de la circulation des idees entre les mondes francophone et anglophone, avant d'effectuer un bref survol des critiques formulees envers les Cultural Studies dans le domaine des etudes en communication mediatique. Puis, l'auteur conclut en lancant un appel a la discussion dans le but de degager les causes du manque de « seduction » de cette approche dans ce sous-champ des etudes en communication.
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 | 0.012 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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; 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".