MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314201390 · doi:10.1177/1533317514539031

Developing CIRCA-BC and Exploring the Role of the Computer as a Third Participant in Conversation

2014· article· en· W2314201390 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

VenueAmerican Journal of Alzheimer s Disease & Other Dementias® · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Systems Theories and Implementation
Canadian institutionsOntario Shores Centre for Mental Health SciencesThompson Rivers UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationPsychologyLinguisticsSociologyCommunicationPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Computer Interactive Reminiscence Conversation Aid (CIRCA) is a software program using touch screen technology and digital materials from public archives to support conversation between people with dementia and their carers. In this 2-phase study, we first worked with seniors' focus groups to identify and select relevant content for a regional adaptation of CIRCA (British Columbia version of CIRCA [CIRCA-BC]). We then pilot tested CIRCA-BC with 3 participants having dementia and a conversation partner, analyzing their interactions to explore how they drew on program content and format to shape their conversations together. Findings provide insight into, first, how participants' shared and distinct social histories influence reminiscence-based conversations and, second, how the computer can be viewed as a third "participant" in the interaction. These findings offer guidelines for ongoing adaptation and application of the CIRCA program in addition to contributing further evidence regarding the role of technology in facilitating meaningful interaction between people with dementia and their carers.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.264 · 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