MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313210142 · doi:10.1177/1103308815569393

The ‘Non-aligned’

2015· article· en· W2313210142 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

VenueYoung · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGossipTypologyFeelingIdentity (music)PsychologySet (abstract data type)Social psychologyInternet privacySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines young people’s narratives of rejection of social networking sites (SNSs). It draws upon data of 30 semi-structured interviews with young people aged 18–26 from Portugal. The findings show that reasons for rejecting SNSs are related to three main categories: perceived usefulness of SNSs; specific social practices in SNSs (e.g., disclosure of personal data and gossip); and self-presentation and identity. In addition, our data point to four types of non-users: resisters, rejecters, surrogate users, and potential converts. This typology challenges dichotomies, such as, usage versus non-usage, access versus non-access, and consumption versus non-consumption. Finally, we explore feelings of missing out and social strategies set in place by non-users to cope with the pervasive use of SNSs among young people. We contribute, therefore, to the limited literature on rejection of social media amongst this group, by giving voice to young non-users and their choices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.304 · 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