MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205863601 · doi:10.7202/1071291ar

Conversational Method in Indigenous Research1

2020· article· en· W4205863601 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Margaret Kovach

Bibliographic record

VenueFirst Peoples Child & Family Review An Interdisciplinary Journal Honouring the Voices Perspectives and Knowledges of First Peoples · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousRelation (database)Action (physics)SociologyQualitative researchTraditional knowledgeAction researchEpistemologyComputer scienceEngineering ethicsManagement sciencePsychologySocial sciencePedagogyEngineeringEcologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In reflecting upon two qualitative research projects incorporating an Indigenous methodology, this article focuses on the use of the conversational method as a means for gathering knowledge through story. The article first provides a theoretical discussion which illustrates that for the conversational method to be identified as an Indigenous research method it must flow from an Indigenous paradigm. The article then moves to an exploration of the conversational method in action and offers reflections on the significance of researcher-in-relation and the inter-relationship between this method, ethics, and care.

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)0.115
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1150.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0090.030
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.377 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations144
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFirst Peoples Child & Family Review An Interdisciplinary Journal Honouring the Voices Perspectives and Knowledges of First PeoplesSame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207