MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Prospects for Identity and Community in Cyberspace

2006· book-chapter· en· W2800768430 on OpenAlexaff
Leah P. Macfadyen

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2006
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyberspaceOnline identityOnline communityIdentity (music)The InternetCredibilityInternet privacyCybercultureInterpersonal communicationSocial psychologyComputer-mediated communicationSociologyPsychologyPublic relationsCommunicationPolitical scienceWorld Wide WebComputer scienceAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Before you read on make sure you have a photo…I will not answer to anyone I cannot imagine physically. Thanks. (Message posted to an online discussion forum) Individuals are increasingly employing Internet and communication technologies (ICTs) to mediate their communications with individuals and groups, both locally and internationally. Elsewhere, I have discussed current perspectives on the origins and impact of cyberculture(s) (Macfadyen, 2006a), theoretical arguments regarding the challenges of intercultural communication in online environments (Macfadyen, 2006b), and recent approaches to studying the language of cyberspace (Macfadyen, 2006c)—the very medium of interpersonal and intragroup communication in what is, as yet, the largely text-based environment of cyberspace. Virtual environments might in some sense be viewed as a communicative “bottleneck”—a milieu in which visual and oral cues or well-developed relationships may be lacking, and in which culturally diverse individuals may hold widely different expectations of how to establish credibility, exchange information, motivate others, give and receive feedback, or critique or evaluate information (Reeder, Macfadyen, Roche, & Chase, 2004). Anecdotal evidence, and a growing body of research data, indicate that the greatest challenge that online communicators (and especially novice online communicators) experience is that of constructing what they consider to be a satisfactory or “authentic” identity in cyberspace, and in interpreting those online identities created by others. Rutter and Smith (1998) note, for example, that in their study of a regionally-based social newsgroup in the UK, communicators showed a real desire to paint “physical pictures” of themselves in the process of identity construction, and frequently included details of physical attributes, age, and marital status. Moreover, authentic identity construction and presentation also appears to contribute to communicator’s perceptions of the possibility for construction of authentic “community” online.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.036
Scholarly communication0.0160.036
Open science0.0010.017
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooks→Same topicSocial Media and Politics→French-language works237,207→