MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209656087

Pandemic Listening: Critical Annotations on a Podcast made in Social Isolation

2021· article· en· W3209656087 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine McLeod, Jason Camlot

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital Media
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningSilencePandemicFeelingAttunementSociologyPsychologyMedia studiesHistoryAestheticsCommunicationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Social psychologyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We no longer sound the same to each other, and we listen to the world differently than we did before. This co-written article presents a series of reflections upon the implications of the increasing dominance of audiovisual telecommunication environments for how we have been listening to each other and to the world around us during the COVID-19 pandemic period. The reflections explored in this article were first articulated within a media production: the podcast episode, “How are we listening, now? Signal, Noise, Silence,” as part of The SpokenWeb Podcast produced by Camlot and McLeod during the first months of the pandemic. “Pandemic Listening” revisits questions posed in the podcast episode about the implications of our increasingly pervasive Zoom-based methods of communication, and the connection between how we are listening and how we are feeling, individually and collectively. In revisiting these discussions as they are transcribed and at a temporal distance from the early days of social restriction when the podcast was produced, this article unpacks discoveries about signal and noise made performatively within the podcast, and theorizes pandemic listening as a condition of sonic instability and attunement that opens opportunities for reflection and transformation of systemic, habitual listening practices.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital MediaFrench-language works237,207