Bibliographic record
Abstract
Correction to: A Grounded Theory Primer for Audiology Semin Hear 2012; 33(02): 135-146 DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1311674 The publisher would like to make note of the permission used for Table 1 in the above article in Seminars in Hearing , Volume 33, Number 2, 2012. p. 138 . The permission notation is indicated on the following page. Table 1 Philosophical and Theoretical Perspectives and Their Implications for Research 43 Worldview Element Postpositivism Constructivism Critical Pragmatism Ontology—nature of reality One reality that we can strive to measure Multiple perspectives, individual realities, that we can strive to represent Political and social reality Reality may be objective but truth is contestable Singular and multiple realities, depending on topic Epistemology—the theory of knowledge embedded in the theoretical perspective and thereby the methodology (Crotty, 42 p. 3), the relationship between the researcher and that being researched (Plano Clark, 43 p. 24) Knowledge can be objectively found, from the data, through impartial methods Researchers and participants are an active part of the creation of knowledge Knowledge created collaboratively involving participants; knowledge affected by power relations and in need of continued revision, reconsideration, questioning Collect data depending on “what works” to address a particular research question Axiology—role of values Unbiased Biased Biased Negotiated Multiple stances Methodology—the strategy, plan of action, process, or design behind the choice and use of particular methods, which link the choice and use of methods to the desired outcomes (Crotty, 42 p. 3) Deductive, predictive, controlled, explanatory (e.g., experimental design; survey research) Inductive, understanding, meaningful, naturalistic, descriptive (e.g., grounded theory, ethnography, narrative) Participatory, emancipatory, gives voice to the voiceless (e.g., participatory action research) Combining, addresses the question through appropriate means (e.g., mixed methods) Language—how the research is presented at academic meetings and in scholarly journals Formal Informal—literary, analogical In terms of advocacy and change, social, political Formal or informal Methods—the techniques used to gather and analyze data Questionnaires, statistical analyses Interviews, focus groups, naturalistic observation, writing, document review Case studies, focus groups, participant observation, photovoice Both quantitative and qualitative methods Adapted with permission from Creswell and Plano Clark. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 2nd edition; 2010.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.053 | 0.224 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.044 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.028 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".