MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332888258 · doi:10.1177/0759106312465552

Bref rappel de trois problèmes méthodologiques de l’histoire de vie en sociologie

2013· article· en· W2332888258 on OpenAlex
Jacques Hamel

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

VenueBulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepresentativeness heuristicPopularitySociologyEpistemologyPsychologyPhilosophySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brief Review of Three Methodological Problems of Life Histories in Sociology: This article reviews the popularity of life histories in sociology in the early 1970s, especially in light of the work done at that time by Daniel Bertaux. Forty years later, what can be said of it? After a brief historical overview, we consider: 1. The issue of representativeness; 2. The status conferred on common sense; and 3. The rigor of the analysis developed on the basis of a life history in the framework of grounded theory. These three topics are discussed so as to show possible solutions to the methodological problems they raise. A simple example of the analysis of a life history illustrates this point.

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)0.120
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.205
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1200.205
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.017
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.412
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.065 · 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