MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Studies in Symbolic Interaction

2013· other· en· W4237001923 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in symbolic interaction · 2013
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Citation (2013), "Studies in Symbolic Interaction", Denzin, N.K. (Ed.) 40th Anniversary of Studies in Symbolic Interaction (Studies in Symbolic Interaction, Vol. 40), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, p. iii. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0163-2396(2013)0000040027 Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited Copyright © 2013, Emerald Group Publishing Limited Book Chapters 40th Anniversary of Studies in Symbolic Interaction Studies in Symbolic Interaction Studies in Symbolic Interaction Copyright Page List of Contributors Introduction Ethnographic Practice(s) and Symbolic Interaction: Work from the Contemporary Ethnography Across the Disciplines Hui Hypertextual Self-Scapes: Crossing the Barriers of the Skin The Contact Sheet: Combining Evocative and Analytic Modes into Visual Autoethnography of the Moment Movement-Initiated Writing in Dance Ethnography Transgressing Boundaries of Private and Public: Auto-Ethnography and Intercultural Funerals An Autoethnography of Queer Transmasculine Femme Incoherence and the Ethics of Trans Research Going “Slowly Slowly”: An Ethnographic Engagement with Resettled Sudanese Men Symbolic Interactionism in Safety Communication in the Workplace Boys’ Visual Representations and Interpretations of Physical Education Ethnographic Fieldwork as Embodied Material Practice: Reflections from Theory and the Field To the Field, and Back… New Religious Movements as Avenues for Self-Change and the Development of Increased Emotional Connectedness The Contributions of the California Sociologies to the Diversity and Development of Symbolic Interaction Terrorism and the National Security University: Public Order Redux Social Media and the 2011 Vancouver Riot Navigating the Terrain of Medical Diagnosis and Treatment: Patient Decision Making and Uncertainty Making Mediation Work: A Sociological View of Human Conflict Do Animals have Selves? We’ll Always have the Self The Selves of other Animals: Reconsidering Mead in Light of Multidisciplinary Evidence About the Authors

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.008
Science and technology studies0.0060.019
Scholarly communication0.0100.012
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

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 head0.531
GPT teacher head0.661
Teacher spread0.130 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in symbolic interactionSame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207