Collective Digital Storytelling in Community-based co-design projects. An Emergent Approach
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
Digital storytelling (DST) can play a critical role in co-design initiatives involving local communities, as a method for bridging exploratory phases and co-design processes. The paper draws on three case studies of collective DST in underserved locations. While DST enabled groups to present themselves and their communities, its evolution showed that activities crystallized into creative concepts and community-driven projects that generated new ideas, new collaboration pathways and new networking capabilities. The structured analysis of these case studies can be used by researchers looking to spur grassroots initiative and encourage local participation and engagement in community-based design.La narration numérique peut jouer un rôle essentiel dans les initiatives de co-design avec des communautés locales, en tant que méthode pour passer de la phase exploratoire de la recherche au processus de co-design. L’article se fonde sur trois études de cas de narration numériques collectives dans des communautés défavorisées. La narration numérique a donnée aux groups la possibilité de se présenter tandis que son processus génératif a cristallisé dans des concepts créatifs et des projets communautaires porteurs de nouvelles idées, voies de collaboration et capacités de réseautage. L'analyse structurée de ces études peut être utilisée par les chercheurs intéressés à stimuler l'initiative locale et à encourager la participation et l'engagement communautaires.
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 | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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