MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312988964 · doi:10.7202/1085576ar

Du statut d’un cadre conceptuel dans unerecherche qualitative

2022· article· en· W4312988964 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marc–André Éthier

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches qualitatives · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQualitative researchPositivismNeglectQualitative analysisTheme (computing)SociologyEpistemologyPsychologySocial sciencePhilosophyComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Qualitative research has often been criticized for its methodological slip towards positivism and especially for its neglect of the dynamic relation between the themes it develops. This article aims at suggesting a qualitative method capable of addressing these difficulties. The authors suggest that Plan Analysis (Caspar, 1995, 1997) is a valid and feasible method to highlight the dynamic links between the themes that emerge using traditional theme analysis. The use of Plan Analysis is illustrated using a study on the motivation for treatment in pedophile sex abusers.

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.688
GPT teacher head0.603
Teacher spread0.084 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches qualitativesSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207