MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132447334 · doi:10.1093/ijpor/edq025

Studying Political Behavior: A Comparison of Internet and Telephone Surveys

2010· article· en· W2132447334 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

VenueInternational Journal of Public Opinion Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSurvey Methodology and Nonresponse
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentativeness heuristicThe InternetSample (material)Data collectionMode (computer interface)PoliticsTelephone surveyTelephone interviewPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologySociologyAdvertisingComputer scienceBusinessWorld Wide WebSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the promise of Internet surveys, there are significant concerns about the representativeness of the sample and survey instrument effects. This article seeks to address these questions by examining the differences and similarities between parallel Internet and telephone surveys conducted in Quebec after the provincial election in 2007. Our results indicate that the responses obtained in each mode differ somewhat from each other but that few inferential differences would occur if conclusions were drawn from the analysis of one dataset or the other. We urge researchers to consider the Internet as a viable mode of data collection, in that the consequences of mode effects appear to be minimal.

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)0.106
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1060.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.640
GPT teacher head0.627
Teacher spread0.013 · 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