‘Maybe you will remember’: interpretation and life course reflexivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the relationship of the fieldworker, self‐proclaimed venerate ‘insider/outsider’, to their shifting role as researcher and traveller on the life course. Ethnographic fieldwork is a transitory research method, reliant on a gaze shifting from the breadth of the field site to the depth of individual human experience. The researcher is the conduit and the instrument of data collection but has not been adequately understood as a transforming agent in the process. Reflexivity is required to understand how the researcher's experiences and shifting position on the life course converge with fieldwork processes and data. Inspired by a phenomenological life course perspective I use data from fieldwork in Russia, Mexico and southern Europe to throw light on the emergent effects of life course shifts on the fieldworker's positionality and interpretation of research experiences and field notes. Researcher and textual reflexivity can result in a more vibrant recognition of the messiness of the human fieldwork experience and the resulting epistemological potential.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.040 | 0.065 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.079 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".