Autoethnography as a Strategy for Engaging in Reflexivity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reflexivity is a key feature in qualitative research, essential for ensuring rigor. As a nurse practitioner with decades of experience with individuals who have chronic diseases, now embarking on a PhD, I am confronted with the question "how will my clinical experiences shape my research?" Since there are few guidelines to help researchers engage in reflexivity in a robust way, deeply buried aspects that may affect the research may be overlooked. The purpose of this paper is to consider the affordances of combining autoethnography (AE) with visual methods to facilitate richer reflexivity. Reflexive activities such as free writing of an autobiographical narrative, drawings of clinical vignettes, and interviews conducted by an experienced qualitative researcher were analyzed to probe and make visible perspectives that may impact knowledge production. Two key themes reflecting my values-fostering advocacy and favoring independence and autonomy were uncovered with this strategy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.059 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it