MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061854397 · doi:10.1177/0963662514563888

Voices from other lands

2015· article· en· W2061854397 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luisa Massarani

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Understanding of Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)Media studiesKingdomPolitical scienceField (mathematics)Public relationsSocial scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the early 1990s, research in public understanding of science has significantly increased and become more systematic and academic. However, most of papers published by the main journals in the field have as origin the English-speaking world of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand: for example, in this very journal, PUS, two-thirds of the empirical material come from these countries. This paper aims both to call attention to unheard voices, and make space for new ones, from other parts of the world, aiming to open space for new voices.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.016
Scholarly communication0.0160.014
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0060.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.003

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 head0.443
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.038 · 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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Understanding of ScienceSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207