MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3031909051 · doi:10.1145/3334480.3382872

Family Group Chat: Family Needs to Manage Contact and Conflict

2020· article· en· W3031909051 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Mogharrab, Carman Neustaedter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicTeam Dynamics and Performance
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstant messagingMeaning (existential)Online chatComputer scienceConstruct (python library)Internet privacyGroup (periodic table)Face (sociological concept)Communication in small groupsChat roomWorld Wide WebPsychologySocial psychologySociologyThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many instant messaging applications offer group chat feature where members can share messages and make voice or video calls with a group of social contacts. We conducted a study to understand how families use group chat and what challenges they face. We found family members develop certain habits in using their family group chat, and their behavior changes when they are separated by distance or during a specific situation such as a conflict. Family members might have challenges to construct meaning from a pile of messages, find a specific message from the past and catch up with the new messages posted in the group. They need more control over when they wish to deliver a message and better ways to share their experiences.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.556
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeam Dynamics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207