MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1601122865 · doi:10.7202/001695ar

Psycho-sociologie de l’actualisation de soi : quelques problèmes de validation

2002· article· fr· W1601122865 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociologie et sociétés · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive and psychological constructs research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La plupart des techniques de cueillette des données relatives au processus d'actualisation de soi ne tiennent pas compte du fait que l'expérience individuelle est faite en situation. Ces techniques supposent alors la généralité des attitudes, des perceptions et des conduites plutôt que leur spécificité. Les auteurs discutent ici de ce problème en suivant deux démarches. Ils comparent d'abord des instruments qui ne font pas référence à ces situations, à d'autres instruments qui, eux, y font explicitement référence. Ils confirment ensuite l'utilité de ce dernier type d'instruments en vérifiant s'ils permettent une discrimination statistique entre des groupes sociologiquement différents. À titre d'illustration, ils introduisent finalement quelques remarques touchant à l'application au contexte québécois du concept de " sous-culture adolescente ".

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.002

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 head0.697
GPT teacher head0.601
Teacher spread0.096 · 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