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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Encouraging a teenager to have a conversation in a semistructured research interview is fraught with difficulties. The authors discuss the methodological challenges encountered when interviewing adolescents of European Canadian, African Canadian, and Punjabi Canadian families who took part in the Family Food Decision-Making Study in two regions of Canada. The researchers were interested in how family members made decisions about food choices. In all, 47 adolescents from 36 families agreed to an interview. The authors found recruitment of teens, locating a quiet space for interviews, the silencing effects of the tape recorder, and asking about abstract concepts to be constraints on adolescents' conversational abilities. Although each interviewer encountered many of the same challenges, some of those challenges played out differently in different ethnocultural groups. This article intersperses discussion about the challenges encountered with the four interviewers' reflections on their interviews with teens and with data from the interviews.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it