MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136994765 · doi:10.1177/0907568213496652

Using video observation and photo elicitation interviews to understand obscured processes in the lives of youth resilience

2013· article· en· W2136994765 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueChildhood · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialogical selfGlobePhoto elicitationNature versus nurtureResilience (materials science)Youth studiesPsychological resilienceSociologyPsychologyProcess (computing)Social psychologyDevelopmental psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the increased effort to understand resilience processes in the lives of youth, the homogeneity of a largely westernized concept needs to be challenged in studies by incorporating meanings of resilience more relevant to youth around the globe. This requires a reconsideration of the methods used to study youth resilience. This article outlines the interactive dialogical process involved in visual elicitation methods that combine moving and still images, resulting in a broader reflective exploration of research questions. Consideration is given specifically to how the combination of these methods better facilitates exploration of previously unarticulated experiences of marginalized youth populations and the processes they engage in to nurture and sustain resilience.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.278 · 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