MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033971119 · doi:10.7202/1084629ar

La netnographie : mise en application d’une méthode d’investigation des communautés virtuelles représentant un intérêt pour l’étude des sujets sensibles

2013· article· fr· W3033971119 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches qualitatives · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La netnographie est apparue depuis quelques années comme la méthode de prédilection pour l’analyse des communautés virtuelles. Cette méthode privilégiée initialement dans les travaux portant sur le comportement du consommateur s’est ensuite élargie aux autres domaines des sciences sociales. Constituée de quatre étapes principales, elle s’inspire de la méthode de recherche ethnographique. Néanmoins, elle est animée de controverse au sein de la communauté académique en ce qui concerne la posture non participante du chercheur. Dans cet article, nous présentons tout d’abord la méthode ainsi que sa mise en application. Ensuite, et à partir de notre expérience de son utilisation, nous apporterons des éléments supplémentaires pour appuyer l’adoption de la posture non participante dans le cas de l’investigation des sujets sensibles.

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.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.223 · 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