MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367845878 · doi:10.1177/11771801231168174

Chikomexochitl: an Indigenous research methodology rooted in the Masewal people’s worldview

2023· article· en· W4367845878 on OpenAlex

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

VenueAlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Cultures and Socio-Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPositivismNarrativeSociologyTraditional knowledgeSocial sciencePolitical scienceEcologyLawBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Masewal (Indigenous people who live in the Huasteca region, Mexico) associate Chikomexochitl (seven flower or corn-child) to a ritual practice and also with the five stages of the development of corn, from seed until the harvest is completed. Just as corn grows, the five stages of the development of corn provides us with a framework to centre the importance of building relationships of trust that grow over time when doing research with Indigenous communities. First, we provide a description of the Huasteca region. We then engage in a critical discussion to challenge the dominant western positivist approach in research, which has historically served to undermine Indigenous perspectives as less valid forms of knowledge. Masewal people’s narratives give meaningful insight into the Masewal worldview and the importance of corn and the corn plant. Finally, we propose the use of Chikomexochitl as an Indigenous research methodology rooted in the Masewal worldview.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.334 · 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