MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3159996584

Canadien(ne)s dans un contexte numérique : Un programme de recherche pour un Canada connecté (Canadians in a Digital Context: A Research Agenda for a Connected Canada)

2018· article· fr· W3159996584 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elizabeth Dubois, Florian Martin-Bariteau

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceContext (archaeology)SociologyHumanitiesArtGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The English version of this paper can be found at https://ssrn.com/abstract=3301352 French Abstract: Il y a un an, nous avons reuni des universitaires, des decideurs publics et des technologues autour d’un objectif commun : mobiliser la recherche sur ce que signifie etre un citoyen numerique au Canada et sur la facon dont nous, chercheurs et militants, pouvons combler les lacunes des donnees qui limitent notre comprehension. Nous avons organise la conference Canada Connecte a l’Universite d’Ottawa les 13 et 14 octobre 2017. Nous voulions permettre la creation d’un reseau de personnes interessees a mieux comprendre l’utilisation d’Internet et des outils numeriques connexes par les Canadiens. Notre objectif etait d’etablir un programme de recherche de maniere collaborative. Comme nombre d’entre vous, au cours de la derniere annee, nous avons reflechi aux idees qui ont ete avancees lors des deux jours de conference et nous avons poursuivi les discussions au moyen de reunions et de collaborations. Dans le present rapport, nous passons en revue les methodes que nous avons utilisees pour orienter les discussions lors de la conference et nous presentons un programme de recherche pratique pour comprendre la citoyennete canadienne dans un environnement numerique. Nous aimerions noter que dans ce rapport, nous utilisons les termes « citoyen » et « citoyennete » au sens sociologique du terme, ce qui met l’accent sur les acteurs sociaux au sein de leurs communautes, plutot que dans le cadre de la perspective juridique du terme. Notre vision pour cette conference est nee d’inquietudes quant au manque de donnees canadiennes sur l’utilisation d’Internet, les preferences et les niveaux de confort. Nous avons appris que cette preoccupation etait deplacee. Certaines donnees existent, mais elles sont cloisonnees et inaccessibles a la plupart des chercheurs en raison d’obstacles institutionnels et communicationnels. Malgre ce manque de donnees coherentes, nos gouvernements motives et actifs, a tous les niveaux, les groupes de la societe civile et les acteurs du secteur prive travaillent afin d’elaborer de nouveaux outils et de nouvelles pratiques. Outre les chercheurs universitaires et des groupes de reflexion dans tout le pays, des groupes de la societe civile et des gouvernements se sont engages a trouver des solutions aux differents problemes et a developper politiques publiques solides qui repondent aux besoins des Canadiens et du Canada. Pourtant, il etait grand temps que notre communaute se reunisse pour reflechir et poser des questions comme : Quelles recherches et quelles methodes d’enquete ont le mieux reussi a creer des changements positifs ? Que devons-nous savoir au sujet des Canadiens pour encourager l’utilisation de nouveaux outils numeriques, des medias sociaux jusqu’aux services gouvernementaux numeriques ? Quels aspects de la vie numerique oublions-nous dans notre travail ? Comment pouvons-nous, en tant qu’universitaires, decideurs publics ou membres de la societe civile, travailler ensemble pour creer des politiques numeriques plus fortes au Canada ? En utilisant ces questions comme tremplin, les participants de Canada connecte ont plonge profondement dans ce que nous connaissons et ce que nous ne connaissons pas sur l’utilisation, le confort et les besoins d’Internet au Canada. Au cours de Canada connecte, nous avons entendu de nombreuses suggestions pour elargir la recherche dans ce domaine, que nous presentons dans ce rapport. Il convient neanmoins de ne pas oublier ce que nous n’avons pu discuter lors de la conference. Notre processus de selection a ete concu pour encourager une representation diversifiee de personnes provenant de partout au Canada et travaillant dans une variete d’organisations, de postes et de milieux. Nous avons cherche a reduire les obstacles lies a la participation en offrant un financement pour les frais de deplacement. Malgre nos efforts pour faire entendre une diversite de voix, nous avons significativement manque de representation des peuples autochtones et des minorites visibles — et les personnes de l’Ontario etaient surrepresentees. Des lors, nous reconnaissons que ces conclusions sont limitees et qu’elles ne tiennent pas compte de l’ensemble des perspectives possibles. Nous avons hâte d’avoir d’autres occasions de nouer des liens avec divers groupes tout en continuant de collaborer avec vous dans le cadre de ce projet. Ce rapport de synthese des connaissances presente les perspectives des participants afin de faciliter la discussion et la collaboration, mais ce n’est que la premiere etape. English Abstract: One year ago, we brought together academics, policymakers, and technologists around the common goal of mobilizing research into what it means to be a digital citizen in Canada and how we, as researchers and activists, can overcome the gaps in data limiting our understandings. We hosted the Connected Canada conference at the University of Ottawa on October 13th and 14th, 2017. We wanted to help facilitate a network of people interested in better understanding Canadians’ uses of the Internet and related digital tools. We aimed to collaboratively establish a research agenda. Like many of you, over the past year, we have reflected on the insights advanced during the two-day conference and continued discussions through meetings and collaboration. In this report, we review the procedures we used to guide discussions at the conference and present a working research agenda for understanding Canadian citizenship in a digital media environment. We would like to note that in this report we use the terms “citizen” and “citizenship” in a sociological sense which emphasizes social actors within their communities, rather than from a legal perspective. Our vision for this conference came from concern about a lack of data about Canadians’ Internet use, preferences and comfort levels. We learned that the concern was misplaced. Some data exists but is siloed and inaccessible to most researchers because of institutional and communication barriers. Despite this lack of consistent data, our motivated and active governments at all levels, civil society groups and private sector actors are working to develop new tools and practices. Along with researchers at universities and think tanks across the country, pockets of robust civil society and government departments have dedicated themselves to help solve problems and develop strong policies which are responsive to the needs of Canadians and Canada. Yet, it remained overdue for our community to come together to reflect and ask questions like: What research and what methods of inquiry have been the most successful at creating positive change? What do we need to know about Canadians to encourage the use of new digital tools which range from social media to digital government services? What aspects of digital life are we forgetting about in our work? How can we, as academics, policy makers, or members of civil society work together to create stronger digital policies in Canada? With these questions as a springboard, participants at Connected Canada dove deep into what we know and what we don’t know about Canadian Internet use, comfort and needs. Throughout Connected Canada, we heard many suggestions for expanding research in this area, which we present in this report. It is important, however, to remember who we did not hear from at the conference. Our application process was designed to encourage a diversity of representation from individuals across Canada working in a variety of organizations, positions, and levels of seniority. We sought to help alleviate barriers to attending by offering funding for travel-related expenses. Despite our efforts to engage a diversity of voices, our meeting lacked significant input from indigenous peoples, visible minorities, and people from Ontario were over represented. As a result, we recognize that these findings are limited and do not capture the full breadth of possible perspectives. We look forward to further opportunities to connect with diverse groups as we continue to collaborate on this project with you. This knowledge synthesis report presents the perspectives of participants in order to facilitate discussion and collaboration, but it is only the first step.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0270.012
Scholarly communication0.0180.007
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.002

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.245 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic Journal→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→