MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135003755 · doi:10.1177/1940844720974108

Conscripted Collaborators: Family Matters in Autoethnography

2021· article· en· W3135003755 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Qualitative Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrespassAutoethnographyConversationValue (mathematics)LoyaltyHarmSociologyWork (physics)Social psychologyPublic relationsPsychologyLawPolitical scienceGender studiesEngineeringComputer scienceCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this collaborative piece, an autoethnographer discusses the ethics of her children’s appearance in her own work, in conversation with one of her (now adult) daughters. Ethical frameworks that approach public exposure primarily as a potential source of harm offer an insufficient frame for the relational effects of stories that bring our personal lifeworlds into our professional publications. Some forms of borrowing, even theft, can hover between trespass and intimacy, as the value of what has been taken is both appropriated and affirmed. How do we determine the “goodness” of work that involves constrained consent, and what does appearing in your mother’s publications do? We offer no answers but mull over the tangle of love and loyalty on which such work depends.

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)0.071
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0710.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.625
GPT teacher head0.717
Teacher spread0.092 · 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