MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151477131 · doi:10.1177/160940690700600104

Using Videorecording to Enhance the Development of Novice Researchers' Interviewing Skills

2007· article· en· W2151477131 on OpenAlex
Lisbeth Uhrenfeldt, Barbara Paterson, Elisabeth O.C. Hall

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 · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterviewReflexivityQualitative researchPsychologyEngineering ethicsMedical educationApplied psychologySociologyMedicineEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little has been written about how to teach novice researchers about qualitative research interviewing. In this article, the authors recognize qualitative research interviewing as a practice that one develops through reflexivity. They propose that novices can develop a reflexive interviewing practice by using a guided framework to review videorecords of the interviews they conduct. The authors discuss the framework and illustrate its use with an exemplar derived from the experience of a novice researcher. They conclude with a discussion of the need for further research about how best to enhance the development of novice researchers as qualitative research interviewers.

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)0.090
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.398
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0900.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.728
GPT teacher head0.758
Teacher spread0.031 · 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