Narrative Online and Offline spaces. Field Notes from the Becoming of an Anthropologist
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
To look back and reflect upon past field diaries, field encounters and events is the invitation of this paper, constructed both as a research note and as a personal research story. The invitation isaddressed especially to young anthropologists. The paper recalls and re-analyses data from three past online fields – one interactive website calling itself the “Romanian online community in Vancouver”, one online forum entitled the “Indian online community in Germany”, and the real-time communication portal Yahoo Messenger. It highlights the out-of-the-ordinary events recorded on each field, which illustrate complex relationships between the online and offline worlds. Further interpreting the fields as what contemporary American anthropologist Timothy Simpson, following Richard Sennett, calls “narrative spaces”, I hope to reveal more of the social construction of these virtual spaces. The main hypothesis to be explored and proposed for further debate are 1) that interactive virtual spaces develop as narrative spaces, around the frame-story offered by theirinitiators and 2) that narratives are continuously transcending different online and offline spaces, connecting them, while being continuously re-negotiated and re-told.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 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