MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1574892279 · doi:10.20360/g2ww28

‘There’s No Going Back’. Roxie’s IPhone®: An Object Ethnography

2012· article· en· W1574892279 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Victoria Carrington

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Literacy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiteit van TilburgKing's College LondonUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsObject (grammar)EthnographyUnderpinningSociologyMobile phoneFocus (optics)Everyday lifeMillerMobile mediaWorld Wide WebMedia studiesComputer scienceInternet privacyPolitical scienceEngineeringArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many of the countries of the developed world, young people live in a web of what Miller and Madianou (2012) have described as ‘polymedia’. That is, many young people, including those that took part in the study underpinning this paper, have an array of media from which to choose when creating and accessing text. Adding a layer of complexity, many of these media forms, along with the lives of many young people, are increasingly mobile. Taking this into account, this paper takes as a specific focus one of the artefacts that constitute this polymedia web, specifically the textual practices that follow for one young person called Roxie. To this end, the paper develops an object ethnography of Roxie’s mobile phone as a way to consider the role of this mobile, technological artefact in the construction of her everyday realities and the textual practices that emerge around this interaction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanguage and LiteracySame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207