MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004426300 · doi:10.1080/01972240701883955

Instant Messaging on Campus: Use and Integration in University Students' Everyday Communication

2008· article· en· W2004426300 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

VenueThe Information Society · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstant messagingComputer scienceMultimediaWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews the body of research on the use and role of instant messaging (IM) in campus life, and how IM is a key part of university students' communication. IM is a synchronous form of communication, and its speed, availability information, and support for multiple conversations have made it appealing for young people. With university students, in particular, showing a heavy reliance on IM, researchers have shown great interest in how university students use IM and how it is integrated in their social and academic life. While studies are emerging in various disciplines, no attempt has been made to integrate the disparate findings and approaches. This article synthesizes key findings, provides a map of the literature, and discusses conceptual problems inherent in the study of IM and other information and communication technologies (ICTs) that will help researchers identify key areas of study and opportunities for future investigation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.261 · 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