MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006798062 · doi:10.1177/075910630809800106

Jeunes, génération numérique et sondage en ligne - L'exemple de deux enquêtes conduites auprès de jeunes québécois

2008· article· en· W2006798062 on OpenAlex
Jacques Hamel, Gabriel Doré, Christian Méthot

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyLignePresentation (obstetrics)Library scienceHumanitiesComputer scienceArtMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Youth, Digital Generation and Online Surveys - The Example of Two Surveys Among Young Quebecois: After a brief presentation of the technical aspects of online surveys, the authors evaluate the advantages and disadvantages by using two online surveys: one on professional and social integration of the digital generation in the "new economy"; the other on college 1 and university student values concerning sociological studies, social work and médecin. The authors ask whether or not this survey method can encourage young people's participation in sociological surveys because of their familiarity with the new information technologies. Should reseurchers be encouraged to use such online surveys in order to obtain youth participation in sociological research?

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)0.221
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.422
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2210.422
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.255
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.174 · 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