MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Facework

2018· other· en· W4229919448 on OpenAlexaff
J. I. Bakker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFace negotiation theoryHonorSociologyObject (grammar)Subject (documents)EpistemologyFace (sociological concept)Social scienceLinguisticsPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The concept of “facework” is a common cultural notion that has to do with status and honor. It was articulated in sociology in a new way by Erving Goffman in 1955 in his book Interaction Ritual . He provides a “subject–object” model of human symbolic interaction in which individuals interact with other individuals in terms of subjective perceptions. He views this as a universal aspect of all cultures at the micro level. Much of the “work” involved is ritualized ceremonies. A more nuanced version of the idea is presented by other scholars.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2010.041

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Blackwell Encyclopedia of SociologySame topicLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesFrench-language works237,207