MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112275503 · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2020.4754

Supporting Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Research Partnerships

2020· article· en· W3112275503 on OpenAlexaff
Rosalind Edwards, Helen Moewaka Barnes, Deborah McGregor, Tula Brannelly

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Qualitative Report · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersESRC National Centre for Research Methods, University of SouthamptonEconomic and Social Research CouncilUK Research and Innovation
KeywordsIndigenousMainstreamGeneral partnershipFraming (construction)SociologyMedia studiesPublic relationsEnvironmental ethicsPolitical scienceGeographyEcologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This commentary discusses the framing of the production of a series of online text-based and visual resources aimed at researchers embarking on Indigenous and non-Indigenous research partnerships, and in particular supporting non-Indigenous researchers to think about our/their methods, assumptions and behaviour. We identify the tension in mainstream funding for such partnerships, and discuss the implications of Northern epistemological claims to agendas and universality as against Southern epistemologies acknowledging diversity and challenging oppressions. We note the distinct bases for Indigenous methodologies. Our commentary outlines and illustrates the online downloadable resources produced by our own Indigenous and non-Indigenous research partnership, including a video/audio recording, a comic, and blog posts, addressing decolonized collaborative practice.

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)0.115
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1150.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.727
GPT teacher head0.696
Teacher spread0.031 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Qualitative ReportSame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207