MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550950189 · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2009.2828

Qualitative Research for Social Workers or Social Work for Qualitative Researchers?

2016· article· en· W2550950189 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Wulff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Qualitative Report · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQualitative researchSocial workSociologySocial researchField (mathematics)Context (archaeology)Work (physics)Engineering ethicsSocial sciencePolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deborah Padgett’s new edition of Qualitative Methods in Social Work Research significantly updates and expands her initial edition. This qualitative research text will be a welcomed addition to social work research courses. While becoming a more inclusive text with wide applicability for the research context today, the author only hints at some of the more contentious or evolving issues that continue to make the field of qualitative research challenging to traditional research approaches. Several places/issues of growth and evolution are suggested by this reviewer.

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 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)0.093
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1200.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.806
GPT teacher head0.746
Teacher spread0.060 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Qualitative ReportSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207