MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1910628926 · doi:10.7202/1030388ar

L’étude de la responsabilité sociale du chercheur-intervenant : quelles conséquences méthodologiques?

2015· article· fr· W1910628926 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Benjamin Dreveton

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement international · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article se propose d’analyser la manière dont la notion de responsabilité sociale questionne une méthodologie de recherche : la recherche-intervention. Dans un premier temps, l’article propose une réflexion sur la notion de responsabilité sociale et sur son application aux activités du chercheur-intervenant. Dans un second temps, à partir l’analyse secondaire de deux recherches-interventions, l’analyse des enjeux liés à la responsabilité sociale du chercheur met en évidence une double nécessité méthodologique : redéfinir la dimension spatiale de l’intervention et repenser l’inscription temporelle de la recherche.

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)0.175
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.175
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.928

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1750.175
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0060.037
Scholarly communication0.0140.017
Open science0.0050.009
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.362
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.137 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement internationalSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207