Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to explore investigator triangulation (IT), a collaborative strategy with potential for mixed methods research (MMR). A critical review of the literature was conducted to identify IT’s core elements and its use in MMR. Five databases, 2 MMR journals, and 13 MMR texts were searched for evidence of IT according to preestablished inclusion criteria. IT descriptions and applications were inconsistent and lacked detailed reporting. Incongruence between IT procedures and associated claims were present. IT was generally limited to single-strand data analysis and was used predominantly to reduce researcher bias. IT’s potential as a generative and pragmatic research strategy used to engage with tensions emerging through diversity in MMR is explored and reporting guidelines are presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.339 | 0.491 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.006 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".