CULTURE and culture at the Royal Ontario Museum: Anthropology Meets Marketing, Part Two
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper reports anthropological research conducted at the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM) by the author over three years. The purpose of the research was a traditional anthropological one: to listen to visitors at length and in depth. Part One, published in Curator 46 (2), offered ethnographic data, anthropological analysis, and a marketing perspective to suggest why the visitor's point of view may seem vertiginously strange to museum personnel. It characterized the conflict between host and guest as the outcome of two competing models of culture: “preferment” and “transformation.” In Part Two, visitors' experiences of the museum serve to illuminate a shift in attitudes toward museum culture. This research establishes a typology of consumer segments and a set of strategic recommendations for freeing the museum from the preferment model without abandoning those visitors who continue to embrace it.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it