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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The ubiquity of mobile telephones worldwide offers a unique opportunity for bidirectional communication between researchers and participants. There are two ways mobile phones could be used to collect self-report data: via Short Message Service (SMS) or app (mobile telephone software applications). This study examined the comparative data quality offered by SMS and app, when mobile phone type, self-report instrument, and sampling schedule are controlled. One hundred ten undergraduate students used their own iPhones to complete the same repeated measures instrument on 20 occasions, responding either by SMS or by app. There were no differences between SMS and app respondents in terms of response rates or response delay. However, data from those responding via SMS was significantly less complete than from app respondents. App respondents rated their respondent experience as more convenient than SMS respondents. Though findings are only generalizable to an undergraduate sample, this suggests that researchers should consider using apps rather than SMS for repeated measures self-report data collection.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it