MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801998646 · doi:10.7202/1045153ar

La mobilisation des savoirs lors de recherches ethnographiques. Illustrations à partir de terrains chez les pompiers et paramédics du Québec

2018· article· fr· W2801998646 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Karine St-Denis

Bibliographic record

VenueApproches inductives Travail intellectuel et construction des connaissances · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La méthode ethnographique se caractérise par son induction, mais observer et analyser une culture et diffuser efficacement ses résultats de recherche nécessite de mobiliser les résultats de recherches antérieures. Le chercheur inductif doit donc parvenir à gérer l’équilibre précaire entre l’induction analytique et l’appel aux savoirs préexistants. À partir de nos travaux récents chez les pompiers et ambulanciers paramédics québécois, nous montrerons comment la mobilisation des connaissances contribue à l’identification et au dépassement des biais inhérents à la recherche terrain, à l’analyse des données ainsi qu’à l’écriture et à la diffusion des résultats de recherche.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaScience and technology studies
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativelow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.448
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.334
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.106 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Science and technology studies

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApproches inductives Travail intellectuel et construction des connaissancesSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingCategoryScience and technology studiesFrench-language works237,207