Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le processus de professionnalisation de la sexologie au Québec est analysé selon la perspective de la sociologie des professions. L'élaboration et l'agencement de la pratique sexologique sont présentés à partir de six démarches stratégiques : l'identification de nouveaux besoins sexuels, la création de la sexologie comme nouvelle branche de la connaissance, l'institutionnalisation de la sexologie, la formation professionnelle des sexologues, l'acquisition d'une reconnaissance sociale, la formation d'une identité et d'une autonomie professionnelles. Selon une approche interactionniste, la sexologie s'est construite par les interactions qui se nouent entre les sexologues et les personnes concernées (surtout les universitaires et les usagers des services sexologiques). Le constat de l'acquisition de l'autonomie universitaire et du développement de l'organisation professionnelle permet de conclure que les stratégies des sexologues ont réussi, mais la professionnalisation de la sexologie n'est pas encore achevée. The process of professionalization of sexology in Quebec is analysed using the framework of sociology of professions. The elaboration and coordination of the practice of sexology are presented through six strategic steps: the identification of new sexual needs, the creation of sexology as a new branch of knowledge, the institutionalisation of sexology, the professional training of sexologists, the acquisition of a social reconnaissance, and the formation of a professional identity and autonomy. According to the interactionist approach, sexology built itself through the interactions bound between sexologists and concerned persons (namely the members of the university and the users of sexology services). The acquisition of graduate autonomy and the development of a professional organization allows one to assume that the above mentioned sexology strategies have succeeded, but the professionalization of sexology has not yet been accomplished.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".