MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145443030 · doi:10.1177/160940690500400403

Co-producing Video Diaries: The Presence of the “Absent” Researcher

2005· article· en· W2145443030 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

VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituatedConstruct (python library)Context (archaeology)Identity (music)PsychologySociologySocial psychologyComputer scienceAestheticsArtHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Video diaries are said to provide a more “direct” understanding of participants' experiences than is afforded by data that are “controlled” by the researcher. In this article, the author problematizes this viewpoint and argues that personal video accounts are socially located constructions that are produced in response to a specific research context. Using examples from research that examines identity with young men who have severe physical impairments, she illustrates these effects and the role of the researcher in co-producing video accounts. Rather than viewing this as problematic, she suggests that examining how participants construct their video accounts as situated research participants provides a valuable source of analyzable data. The author outlines a method for interrogating video accounts that builds on these foundational assumptions.

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)0.106
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.542
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1060.106
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.936
GPT teacher head0.807
Teacher spread0.128 · 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