MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131183568 · doi:10.1177/1532708609332424

Toward a Technography of Everyday Life: The Methodological Legacy of James W. Carey's Ecology of Technoculture as Communication

2009· article· en· W2131183568 on OpenAlexaff
Phillip Vannini, Jaigris Hodson, April Vannini

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture Studies &#x2194 Critical Methodologies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Communication and Language
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityRoyal Roads University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCraftEthnographyEveryday lifeSociologyNatural (archaeology)Representation (politics)AestheticsEcologyEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyVisual artsArtAnthropologyHistoryPhilosophyPolitical scienceBiologyLawPoliticsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article identifies Carey's contributions to the concept of technoculture and attempts to systematize his writings on communication, culture, and technology in order to craft a methodological strategy for the study of technoculture based on participant observation and contemporary ethnographic practices of representation. After introducing a definition of technoculture, we outline how technography—the study of technoculture in everyday life—builds upon two sensitizing metaphors: technoculture as ecology and as semiosis. The discussion of technography shows the potential of this research strategy for the study of the symbolic interaction among technics, technological practices, social agents, and the natural environment.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0080.107
Scholarly communication0.0170.020
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCulture Studies &#x2194 Critical MethodologiesSame topicDigital Communication and LanguageFrench-language works237,207