MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1586560978 · doi:10.5901/ajis.2015.v4n1s2p75

Negotiating the Digital Line: A Qualitative Inquiry into the Use of Communication Technologies in Professional Child and Youth Care Practice

2015· article· en· W1586560978 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFlooding and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationAgency (philosophy)Qualitative researchWork (physics)Child careEmerging technologiesPublic relationsEngineering ethicsPsychologyMedical educationSociologyNursingPolitical scienceMedicineEngineeringComputer scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While social and communication technologies are changing the world at warp speed, little is known about how Child and Youth Care (CYC) practitioners are using these technologies in their work with children, youth, and families. This article reports findings from a qualitative study that explored potential boundary and ethical implications related to the integration of communication technologies by CYC practitioners in their professional relationships with children, youth, and families. The study also sought to examine what form of communication technologies is being used most commonly and the nature of agency policies, standards, and procedures that address the use of this technology by CYC practitioners with clients. DOI: 10.5901/ajis.2015.v4n1s2p75

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.274 · 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