MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2937384251 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs102-3201918857

RESEARCHING PAIN — RE-SEARCHING THE RESEARCHER: PULLING BACK THE CURTAIN ON THE INNER LIFE AND ANXIETY OF THE INVESTIGATOR

2019· article· en· W2937384251 on OpenAlexaffvenue
James P. Anglin, Angela Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyOrder (exchange)Process (computing)AnxietyApplied psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seldom do researchers comment on or discuss in their publications the impact of their research on themselves, nor do they explore the impact of their emotions on their research data gathering or findings. The authors provide excerpts from two of their own research studies to illustrate some of the personal dimensions which they, along with George Devereux, claim are central and significant in the process of social science research. We suggest that is it is important to introduce new researchers to the psychoemotional dimensions of the researcher’s own experiences in the research process in order to both sensitize them to potential research findings (often hidden), and prepare them for the possible (even likely) impacts on themselves as researchers, professionals, and human beings.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.502
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.046 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicParticipatory Visual Research MethodsFrench-language works237,207