MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312212104 · doi:10.1002/jcop.22981

Introduction to the special issue on critical realism

2022· article· en· W4312212104 on OpenAlex
François Lauzier‐Jobin, Liesette Brunson, Bradley D. Olson

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Realism in Sociology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritical realism (philosophy of perception)EpistemologyAxiologyOntologyAction (physics)RealismSubject (documents)SociologyPhilosophy of computer scienceWestern philosophySocial sciencePhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This special issue explores how philosophy of science matters for both research and social action in community psychology. It explores the complex issue of what might be appropriate philosophical bases for community psychology theory, research, and practice. In particular, it focuses on critical realism, a relatively new approach to the philosophy of science. In this introductory article, we start by discussing the importance of philosophy of science for community psychologists. We then situate our subject by exploring the history of paradigms in community psychology. We next offer a brief description of critical realism by describing its assumptions on ontology (nature of the world), epistemology (theory of knowledge), axiology (theory of values), and methodology (theory of action).

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.403 · 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