Cyberspace, real place: Thoughts on doing in contemporary occupations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today, the distinction between cyberspace and real space represents a false dichotomy. Wireless laptop computers, personal digital assistant devices and similar emergent information and communication technology (ICT) objects, along with the cyberspace/ internet information they mediate, may be intervening between what and how we are able to ‘do’ in real places. This phenomenon is seen in many contemporary occupations in the westernized world and intensifies the connections among occupation, place, and the internet. In this article, we begin to examine this connection, starting from Hocking's person‐object interaction model. Advocating the addition of an informational domain to objects in the model, we discuss its application to internet informational mediating ICT objects. Examples are used to illustrate the complexities of introducing ICT objects and the information they mediate, to a place or across different places, and how their inclusion in occupational scientists’ conscious consideration may contribute to the discipline's broader understanding of many contemporary occupations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.067 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".