Reconnaissance de soi et rapport au temps dans l’entretien sociologique auprès de femmes de plus de cinquante ans. Temps d’arrêt sur une image identitaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’entretien sociologique organise les formes de l’expression identitaire, en plaçant l’enquêté narrant son histoire face à un interlocuteur qui occupe une position de tiers significatif. À l’appui d’entretiens réalisés auprès de femmes âgées de plus de cinquante ans, cet article questionne le statut de la parole recueillie en sondant les modalités de l’identification et de la reconnaissance de soi dans le cadre contraignant du protocole sociologique. Il met en évidence la complexité des discours, soumis aux normes temporelles socialement admises, mais aussi informés par une mémoire sélective et par le corps qui, à son tour, saisit le vif de l’identité. S’identifier revient à désigner, avec gêne ou aisance, les accomplissements de sa vie, en conformité ou non avec les injonctions sociales. Le récit produit une image identitaire instable, d’un soi à temporalité variable, défiant le sociologue dans sa pratique interprétative.
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 | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".