MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093044887 · doi:10.5153/sro.2293

Reflections on Doing Research Grounded in My Experience of Perinatal Loss: From Auto/biography to Autoethnography

2011· article· en· W2093044887 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociological Research Online · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoethnographyGrounded theoryNarrativeBiographySociologyPsychoanalysisQualitative researchDoctoral dissertationNarrative inquiryEpistemologyPsychologyGender studiesAestheticsLiteratureArtSocial sciencePhilosophyPolitical scienceHigher education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article, derived from my doctoral dissertation ( DAVIDSON 2007 ) examining the emergence of hospital protocols for perinatal bereavement during the last half of the twentieth century in Canada, focuses on the methodological complexities – the draw, the drain, and the delight of doing qualitative research grounded in my own experience of perinatal loss. With my dissertation now a fait a complete, reflecting back on my research, my use of autoethnography at this point allows a return to a story that has already happened and involves “the construction and reconstruction’ of my personal experiences as narratives’ ( AUTREY 2003 : 10). Taking this narrative turn, my enquiry here shifts auto/biography to autoethnography as a mode of enquiry.

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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.809
GPT teacher head0.698
Teacher spread0.111 · 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