MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024032521 · doi:10.1177/1532708615572359

Research For/About/With the Community

2015· article· en· W2024032521 on OpenAlexaff
Cynthia Levine‐Rasky

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture Studies &#x2194 Critical Methodologies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRomani and Gypsy Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVignetteCommunity-based participatory researchParticipatory action researchSociologyCitizen journalismPosition (finance)Process (computing)Work (physics)Public relationsPsychologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide WebBusinessAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The complexity of conducting community-based participatory research (CBPR) at a small Romani organization is described through montage. Articulating with a desire for social change and the correction of the multiple injustices meted out to those who identify as Roma, CBPR commends collaborative research with a community. However, the researcher found herself not only working with the community but also doing work for them and about them—activities that do not sit comfortably with the CBPR approach. The researcher’s disparate roles are presented as vignette, dialogue, and in graphic form corresponding to three prepositions, for/about/with. In this way, she illustrates the tensions associated with the process of conducting CBPR from her proximate position in the organization.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.036
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.829
GPT teacher head0.692
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.

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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCulture Studies &#x2194 Critical MethodologiesSame topicRomani and Gypsy StudiesFrench-language works237,207