MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306175618 · doi:10.1002/pra2.632

<scp>Re‐Imagining</scp> International Research: Challenges and Approaches

2022· article· en· W4306175618 on OpenAlexaff
Krystyna K. Matusiak, Kawanna Bright, Mónica Colón‐Aguirre, Debbie Schachter, Anna Maria Tammaro, Amy VanScoy

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsLangara College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEngineering ethicsEthical issuesSociologyPolitical scienceResearch ethicsInternational communityPublic relationsSocial scienceEngineeringLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract International research examines the differences and similarities in information processes and phenomena across countries or cultures. International studies are challenging to conduct due to cultural and linguistic barriers, ethical concerns, methodological complexities, and the legacy of the colonial research model. This 90‐minute panel will focus on the ethical and methodological challenges and practical solutions in conducting international research. The panelists will share their experiences from three international studies and will invite the scholarly community to engage critically in discussing methodological issues and ethical concerns in LIS international research.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.212
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Association for Information Science and TechnologySame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207