MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976205755 · doi:10.1177/1077800407300766

Strategic Stories and Reflexive Interruptions

2007· article· en· W1976205755 on OpenAlexaff
Pamela Downe

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Inquiry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflexivityNarrativeInterrogationFraming (construction)SociologyNarrative inquiryDialecticConstruct (python library)Personal narrativeGender studiesEpistemologyAestheticsPsychologyHistorySocial scienceLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a narrative that emerged during research with 12 young women involved in cross-border sex work in the eastern Caribbean. This narrative draws on a locally specific historical reference and allows the young women to construct a notion of a “healthy home” amidst the uprootedness, frequent travel, and violence and risk that they face in their work. Drawing on Bruno Latour's constructivist notion of reflexivity, the framing of this narrative is examined for what it reveals about the personal reaction of the researcher as well as the dominant discourse of sex trafficking. By offering reflexive interruptions that make the attention and gaze of the researcher explicit and by explaining how the master narrative of sex trafficking must be drawn on with critical interrogation, the dialectic properties and contingent nature of the women's narrative are explored.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.028
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.267
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative InquirySame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207