MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168422045 · doi:10.1177/1049732303261866

Kanadier Mennonites: A Case Study Examining Research Challenges Among Religious Groups

2004· article· en· W2168422045 on OpenAlexaff
Barry Hall, Judith C. Kulig

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFocus groupMainstreamSociologyQualitative researchContext (archaeology)Gender studiesPsychologySocial scienceAnthropologyPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the authors address the research issues experienced in carrying out a study with the Kanadier Mennonites, members of the Anabaptist religious group who support a lifestyle that demonstrates separation from mainstream society. The authors provide a brief description of the Kanadiers along with the purpose of the research and a synopsis of the sample. They focus primarily on discussing the methodological challenges in approaching this group. In addition, they place emphasis on addressing the research questions in ways that are respectful and nonintrusive. They discuss the lessons learned from the study within the context of qualitative cross-cultural research.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.617
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.077 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Health ResearchSame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207