MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040711787

A Divided Role : - a qualitative study exploring how public library professionals are facing change within their profession

2019· article· en· W3040711787 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jenny Nilsson

Bibliographic record

VenueDiVA (Linnaeus University) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonQualitative researchPublic relationsEmpirical researchPolitical scienceSociologyEngineering ethicsSocial scienceEngineeringEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to changes within the public library profession and a lack of previous research regarding its societal role, this essay explores this phenomenon. The objective of this empirical study is to explore the societal role of public library professionals in Canada through the analyzation of semi-structured interview transcripts and a guideline document for professionals. The results were analyzed and sensitized through the theoretical frameworks of Abbott’s professionalization theory (1988) and Bourdieu’s praxeology theory (1986; 1992). Through grounded theorization, the study found that the role of professionals has changed, and is changing, due to not only external but also internal factors in the form of a conflict. This conflict was conceptualized through sensitization of Bourdieu’s framework as challenging and enabling ideas of the doxa of the profession. This conceptualization was understood further through the lens of Abbott’s system of professions where claims of expertise, which is viewed as a crucial part of professionalization, was theorized as an important part of that conflict.

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)0.001
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 score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.011
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.131 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiVA (Linnaeus University)Same topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207