MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090032223 · doi:10.1177/0907568204040186

Why Won’t They Listen to Us?

2004· article· en· W2090032223 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

VenueChildhood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationPerspective (graphical)PsychologyPower (physics)Context (archaeology)Social researchPsychological researchObject (grammar)Subject (documents)SociologySocial psychologyEpistemologySocial scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses the need for authentic social research with children given the fact that increasingly such research is being relied on to inform social policy which profoundly affects the lives of children. Authentic research is operationalized in this article as that research which gives power and voice to child research participants and which provides insights into their subjective world. Such research allows the children to a degree to be ‘subject’ or ‘collaborator’ in the research process rather than simply study ‘object’. Giving power and voice to children in the research context involves issues of research methodology and opportunities to contribute to research agendas and ethics guidelines such that the need and right to be heard is better met. Empathetic understanding in research with children as a byproduct of combining quantitative approaches with the phenomenological perspective is also discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.271 · 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