Bibliographic record
Abstract
For media users enjoying a context of near constant connection across a changing set of platforms, the management of that communication environment is a central concern in the management of everyday life. The multiplication and divergence of possible uses across these platforms emerge alongside the increasing cross-media integration of informational, interactive and entertainment practices with interpersonal communication. The individual’s perception of that environment of increasingly differentiated communication possibilities becomes a site for managing and partially negotiating the limits, form and organization of one’s social world. Expanding upon Gershon’s (2010) notion of media ideologies, this article focuses on the increasing divergence of the perceived and preferred uses of media technologies. The analytical terms ‘social tool’ and ‘social device’ are deployed to tease apart the central ordering experience of perceived ‘mutual engagement’ within media practices. The perceived presence or lack thereof within such engagement serves to recursively delimit and order the media user’s social landscape, pointing to further reflexive management of one’s own media ideology through a highly idiosyncratic ‘relational ordering’ of perceived and preferred platform uses, amidst social and technological change.
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 | 0.005 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".