MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1584247929 · doi:10.1080/14427591.2015.1045014

Situational Analysis: A Visual Analytic Approach that Unpacks the Complexity of Occupation

2015· article· en· W1584247929 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca M. Aldrich, Debbie Laliberté Rudman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Occupational Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituational ethicsContradictionPerspective (graphical)ScholarshipSociologySituation analysisTransactional analysisOccupational sciencePsychologyEpistemologySocial psychologyComputer scienceManagementPolitical scienceOccupational therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concurrent with the development of a transactional perspective, the notion of “the situation” has increasingly been taken up in occupational science scholarship. Accordingly, research methodologies and approaches that capture the multifaceted elements of situations need to be explored. Situational analysis, pioneered by sociologist and grounded theorist Adele Clarke, shows promise for facilitating inquiries into situations of occupational engagement. In this article we review the situational analysis approach and provide an example of its application to research on the situation of long-term unemployment. In this application, situational mapping illuminated the contradiction of simultaneously being “activated” and “stuck”. Situational analysis helped unpack how this contradiction was shaped within North American contexts. Based on this example and others outside the occupational science literature, we discuss how situational analysis can be a useful tool for fostering critical, socially-responsive, and community-engaged occupational science research.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.491
GPT teacher head0.570
Teacher spread0.078 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations42
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Occupational ScienceSame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207