MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118060166 · doi:10.1177/0894439312453001

Recruitment of Sex Buyers

2012· article· en· W2118060166 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

VenueSocial Science Computer Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData collectionQualitative propertyArgument (complex analysis)Process (computing)Field (mathematics)Survey data collectionBusinessMarketingAdvertisingPsychologyInternet privacyPublic relationsComputer scienceSociologyPolitical scienceMedicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we draw upon data from a large-scale mixed methods investigation of clients of commercial sex workers in Canada to illustrate the potential value that understanding and integrating computer and network technology has for enhancing access to, and participation from, marginalized and stigmatized populations. In particular, we present qualitative data from analysis of our research field notes as well as an analysis of quantitative data from response monitoring and feedback features built into the actual data collection process to help support our argument that, for some populations, network technology–based recruitment strategies should be recognized as the preferred recruitment option. In addition, we discuss the potential utility and application of viral solicitation, a newly emerging computer network-based nonprobability technique, for contacting and securing the participation of stigmatized and marginalized research participants. Our recruitment of sex buyers through web-based listserves was the most successful participant solicitation strategy, generating 63.18% ( n = 544) of our survey respondents. Conventional recruitment (advertising in print-based media and in adult-oriented businesses) generated few participants (2.90%, n = 25). Viral solicitation acted as an important low-cost supplemental means of recruitment, generating a further 164 survey participants (19.05% of survey participants).

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.308 · 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