MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Emotionally intelligent research

2004· article· en· W2093384135 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

VenueArea · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture Food and Rural Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionVignetteStrict constructionismContext (archaeology)Social constructionismSociologyPsychologySocial psychologyEpistemologySocial scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key to this paper is not so much the emotions of the researcher that emanate from fieldwork, but those of the researched (and their emotional intelligence). Using a vignette of research on the impact of the 2001 foot and mouth disease outbreak on rural economies in the north of England, the paper explores emotions as clues and ways of seeing. It is broadly influenced by a social constructionist approach that views emotion as created and understood in the context of relationships with others and made meaningful through discourses, language and signifiers. It does not, though, deny the physical sensations that accompany emotion and the ways in which emotions are embodied as individuals interact with others (human and non‐human).

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.714
GPT teacher head0.662
Teacher spread0.052 · 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