MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089234988 · doi:10.1177/1525822x20958851

Relationship Change, Network Change, and the Use of Single Name Generators in Longitudinal Research on Social Support

2020· article· en· W3089234988 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Marin, Soli Dubash

Bibliographic record

VenueField Methods · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLongitudinal dataLongitudinal studySocial supportComputer scienceSocial network (sociolinguistics)PsychologySocial psychologyData miningWorld Wide WebMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As relationships change and people change the kinds of support they provide, name generators that collect information about ties that provide particular kinds of support at repeated points of time may not effectively capture ties that are active but whose roles have changed. This article shows that a significant minority of network members change the kinds of support they provide. They either discontinue a support previously provided or provide a new type of support. We examine the implications of this finding for longitudinal studies of support networks based on single name generators and show that this practice can result in frequent misperceptions of network membership change.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.092
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.204
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0920.204
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.818
GPT teacher head0.571
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueField MethodsSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207