MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Estratégias de coleta de dados com trabalhadores de baixa escolaridade

2002· article· pt· W2054128918 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

VenueEstudos de Psicologia (Natal) · 2002
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicBusiness and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologySociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Um olhar para as pesquisas desenvolvidas no campo da Psicologia Organizacional e do Trabalho no Brasil aponta que os pesquisadores optam por estudar categorias ocupacionais cujos trabalhadores são mais instruídos. Tal realidade minimiza as possibilidades de generalização e de aplicação dos resultados. Alguns pesquisadores, entretanto, insistem em focalizar as categorias mais desfavorecidas e concentradoras de pessoas com baixa escolaridade. Que opções metodológicas realizam? Quais instrumentos usam? Com o objetivo de trazer respostas a estas questões, foram levantadas as técnicas de coleta de dados utilizadas pelos pesquisadores. O uso de questionário estruturado é viabilizado como técnica de coleta de dados, na qual se recorre ao uso de gradações de tonalidades de cores em substituição às escalas tradicionais. Por fim, apresenta-se uma proposta baseada na combinação de técnicas. A divulgação da proposta pode contribuir para enfrentar o desafio da relevância social e da generalização dos resultados das pesquisas.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.232 · 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