Protocolo verbal: análisis de la producción científica, 1941-2013
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
Introduccion: el protocolo verbal es una tecnica introspectiva de recoleccion de datos durante la ejecucion de una tarea en la que el sujeto verbaliza en voz alta su proceso de pensamiento. Se pretende conocer cuales son las disciplinas cientificas que estan usando o han utilizado la metodologia del protocolo verbal. Metodos: para ello, se realizo una busqueda en las bases de datos de la Web of Science y SCOPUS usando la estrategia thin* alou*. Resultados: se recuperaron 1.481 documentos, extrayendo variables para analizar la produccion cientifica (autorias, instituciones, revistas) y categorias tematicas, asi como un analisis especifico de los ochenta y dos articulos localizados que provienen de investigadores del area de Biblioteconomia y Documentacion. Conclusiones: se concluye que es una tecnica que ha sido usada cerca de setenta y cinco anos, principalmente para realizar investigaciones en el ambito universitario desde los Paises Bajos, Estados Unidos y Canada en Psicologia, Educacion y Medicina, pero tambien en otras areas como Computacion, Ergonomia, Ciencia de la Informacion y Biblioteconomia, Enfermeria, entre otras.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
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