MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2864628138 · doi:10.36510/learnland.v11i2.948

A Rediscovery of Voice: The Story of Self Through a Qualitative Lens

2018· article· en· W2864628138 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sabina Choudhury

Bibliographic record

VenueLEARNing Landscapes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Qualitative researchPoint (geometry)CommunicationAestheticsLinguisticsSociologyVisual artsArtComputer sciencePhilosophySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The following article tells the story of how a qualitative research methods PhD course and the creation of a researcher portfolio helped to answer the sometimes elusive question of, “Who am I as a researcher?” and ultimately led to a rediscovery of voice. This story describes how using various modes of inquiry set the groundwork for my rediscovery of voice. This is my story. This is my story about voice. This is my story about how this PhD course provided the starting point to discover who I was as a researcher, and, more importantly, allowed me to reclaim my lost voice.

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)0.061
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.320

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0610.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0340.121
Scholarly communication0.0270.035
Open science0.0040.025
Research integrity0.0100.021
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLEARNing LandscapesSame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207