MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066141084 · doi:10.1108/00220411011087841

Managing documents at home for serious leisure: a case study of the hobby of gourmet cooking

2010· article· en· W2066141084 on OpenAlexaff
Jenna Hartel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Documentation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPersonal Information Management and User Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHobbyComputer scienceEthnographyOriginalityConceptual frameworkData collectionSociologyWorld Wide WebQualitative researchSocial scienceVisual artsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to describe the way participants in the hobby of gourmet cooking in the USA manage culinary information in their homes. Design/methodology/approach The study utilizes domain analysis and serious leisure as a conceptual framework and employs an ethnographic approach. In total 20 gourmet cooks in the USA were interviewed at home and then their culinary information collections were documented through a guided tour and photographic inventory. The resulting ethnographic record was analyzed using grounded theory and NVivo software. Findings The findings introduce the personal culinary library (PCL): a constellation of cooking‐related information resources and information structures in the home of the gourmet cook, and an associated set of upkeep activities that increase with the collection's size. PCLs are shown to vary in content, scale, distribution in space, and their role in the hobby. The personal libraries are characterized as small, medium or large and case studies of each extreme are presented. Larger PCLs are cast as a bibliographic pyramid distributed throughout the home in the form of a mother lode, zone, recipe collection, and binder. Practical implications Insights are provided into three areas: scientific ethnography as a methodology; a theory of documents in the hobby; and the changing role of information professionals given the increasing prevalence of home‐based information collections. Originality/value This project provides an original conceptual framework and research method for the study of information in personal spaces such as the home, and describes information phenomena in a popular, serious leisure, hobby setting.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations123
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of DocumentationSame topicPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorFrench-language works237,207