MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106787271 · doi:10.1002/meet.2011.14504801209

Photovoice: A participatory method for information science

2011· article· en· W2106787271 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa M. Given, Anna Opryshko, Heidi Julien, Jorden Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoicePhoto elicitationPaceParticipatory action researchInformation literacyCommunity-based participatory researchCitizen journalismField (mathematics)Process (computing)Medical educationSociologyKnowledge managementPsychologyPublic relationsData sciencePedagogyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceMedicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To keep pace with the social reality created by a Web 2.0 world, contemporary research studies must employ participatory research methods. Photovoice has emerged from the fields of health and community assessment studies as a photo elicitation technique that facilitates participant involvement at all stages of the research process. This poster presents Photovoice as used in an ongoing longitudinal research study assessing the information literacy (IL) skills of students as they transition from high school to university. The poster highlights how this research method can be employed in research practices across the field of information science with a focus on studies of individuals' use of, and engagement with technology.

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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.310
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations26
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the American Society for Information Science and TechnologySame topicParticipatory Visual Research MethodsFrench-language works237,207