MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2292795078 · doi:10.14288/1.0100116

The production of an ethnography : some methodological and substantive issues for analyzing social setttings

2010· article· en· W2292795078 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bruce Allen Katz

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnographyProduction (economics)Social productionSociologyEpistemologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceEconomicsAnthropologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study seeks to provide an analysis of some of the features which underly any ethnographic description. First, it focuses on the daily routine of a community medical clinic in a large city in Western Canada, then it "looks back" on the methodological and theoretical issues inherent in the production of any ethnography. A daily routine known as "chart rounds" (a review of patients' medical histories) is examined in detail. That description itself then becomes a topic of inquiry in its own right. The analysis rests on field observations conducted over a year and a half within the research setting. During this period the researcher was privy to medical examinations, to chart rounds, and to much of the ongoing routine of the Clinic. I was also able to tape-record various aspects of its organization. Most of the material which I have analyzed consists of transcriptions taken from tape recordings of doctor-patient interviews and of chart rounds. Some of the issues which will be given special attention are (1) the beginning of the ethnographic report and the relationship of this section to the subsequent sections of an ethnography; (2) how it is that ethnographic descriptions are necessarily based in a set of common sense relevancies; (3) the use of 'talk' in interaction and as a source of data for "discovering" the self-organizing features of the settings and occasions from which this talk is collected; and (4) the relationship between ethnographic description and the researcher in the research setting. The research reported here is to be seen as exploratory and tentative. It is not intended as a -manual for ethnographic researchers, but as an attempt to explicate some of the organizational features in the construction of an ethnographic description. No doubt it raises many more questions than it answers, but its purpose will be satisfied if it is able to generate some debate about the organization of ethnographies.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.330
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.322
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.3300.322
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0130.014
Science and technology studies0.0230.100
Scholarly communication0.0320.029
Open science0.0080.018
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.257 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicLabor Movements and Unions→French-language works237,207→