Following the Flâneur: The Methodological Possibilities and Applications of Flânerie in New Urban Spaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers the historic concept of flânerie, the act of “strolling” through urban spaces, as an unconventional approach to gathering qualitative data. In adopting a flânerie identity, the researcher is able to critically analyze urban spaces and the relation of self to those spaces. Through a (re)conceptualization of the 19th century flâneur, we explicate the methodological possibilities and applications of flânerie, in particular, as suited to excavating new urban tropes, whilst giving expression to new urban subjectivities. The authors adopt a flânerie identity, engaging in a qualitative inquiry vis-à-vis two “strolls” occurring in Toronto, Canada. The strolls provide opportunities to interrogate subjectivities and perceptions of the authors in relation to the urban spaces they were traversing. In doing so, this paper emphasizes the legitimacy of adopting a flâneur identity as a valid source of qualitative inquiry; one that is able to bring meaning to spaces and places.
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 | 0.068 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.068 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".