MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225009018 · doi:10.1177/14687941221096604

A side-by-side methodological approach: Shared experience, informality and adaptation

2022· article· en· W4225009018 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

VenueQualitative Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyQualitative researchFace (sociological concept)Adaptation (eye)Common groundGreat RiftPublic relationsPsychologySocial sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In shifting environments common to peace and conflict research, methodological grounding is rooted in the fluctuating roles undertaken by the researcher through time and space as one seeks a worldview that is experienced by research participants. This article introduces a side-by-side methodological approach, which developed through research of cross-community interaction amongst ice hockey supporters in Belfast. Influenced by qualitative research that sought to access local voices, this article moves from conceptual guidance and planning into the stands of the SSE Arena, where interviews were conducted with the person in the seat beside the researcher during ice hockey games. In doing so, this immersive methodology offers a contribution to unearthing unheard voices in this oft-studied region through the opportunity to make connection that was unscripted, aided by the informality of the research setting and the limited face-to-face interaction.

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)0.171
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1710.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.874
GPT teacher head0.706
Teacher spread0.169 · 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