MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891591588 · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3243

The Challenging and Empowering Elements of Doctoral Data Collection

2018· article· en· W2891591588 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lawrence Nyika

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Qualitative Report · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNova Scotia Health Research Foundation
KeywordsData collectionNarrativeAppealQualitative researchSociologyPedagogyPsychologyMedical educationPolitical scienceSocial scienceMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data collection was the most challenging aspect of my doctoral journey as an African immigrant student due to a highly unpredictable research environment. This article reports on my doctoral fieldwork experiences in one Canadian province’s public secondary schools. The purpose of the article is to highlight data collection challenges and supports in qualitative research. Several barriers to doctoral fieldwork are evidenced in the article, whose successful navigation was enabled by an empowering spiritual experience and supportive and engaging supervision. Doctoral data collection narratives may not appeal to every reader, but their academic and therapeutic significance should not be underestimated.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.259
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Qualitative ReportSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207