Communication interculturelle et internationale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Qu’est-ce que le champ d’études et de recherche en communication interculturelle et internationale (CII) ? Historiquement, la communication interculturelle et la communication internationale se sont différenciées l’une de l’autre par leurs traditions et objets de recherche (certains enjeux, thématiques et vocabulaires sont propres à l’interculturel ou à l’international), ainsi que par leur inscription dans des programmes et des cursus académiques souvent perçus et institutionnalisés comme étant distincts.Pourtant, puisque les assisses épistémologiques, méthodologiques et théoriques de l’interculturel et de l’international communicationnels sont complémentaires et en constant dialogue, nous prenons le parti de considérer la communication interculturelle et internationale comme un champ d’études et de recherches en soi. Ainsi, ce premier de deux numéros thématiques de Communiquer propose d’actualiser les apports théoriques et les résultats de travaux contribuant au développement du champ de la communication interculturelle et internationale. Certains articles de ce numéro explorent davantage des enjeux de communication associés aux contextes de communication à l’international ; d’autres étudient les échanges et les rencontres interculturels sous diverses formes. Il vise également le développement et la mise en valeur de la recherche francophone effectuée dans ce(s) champ(s) de la communication. At first, intercultural communication and international communication distinguished themselves by their traditions and objects of research (some issues, thematics and terminologies are specific to one or the other), but also by their frequent inclusion in distinct institutionalized academic curricula. Yet, interestingly, the epistemological, methodological and theoretical foundations of intercultural communication as well as international communication are complementary and engaged in an ongoing dialogue. Therefore, we rather prefer to consider intercultural and international communication as a field of study and research in itself. Thus, this special issue of Communiquer – the first of two – proposes to actualise and extend theoretical and empirical contributions to develop intercultural and international communication as a field. Some articles here presented explore communication issues in international communication contexts; while others study more specifically intercultural encounters in their various forms. This special issue also aims to nourish and broadcast francophone research in these fields of communication.
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 | 0.014 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.030 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.005 |
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".