MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416137585 · doi:10.1177/16094069251397351

360-Degree Video for Whole Scene Capture: From Immersive Realism to Immersive Holism in Place-Based Research

2025· article· en· W4416137585 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Cinnamon, Agnieszka Leszczynski, Suzi Asa, Lindi Jahiu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFocus Groups and Qualitative Methods
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsData collectionHolismField (mathematics)Immersion (mathematics)Coding (social sciences)EthnographyImmersive technology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

360-degree video is an affordable and easy-to-use technology for social science research. It holds significant potential for capturing spatio-temporal aspects of the social world from a fully omni-directional spatial perspective; however, gaps remain as to how it can be used to support field-based data collection and analysis. In this short piece we offer two contributions to the literature on 360-degree video for qualitative social science research on place. First, we draw on evidence from our multi-city study of ‘urban platform temporalities’ to develop a step-by-step procedure for producing and analyzing 360-degree digital video datasets, demonstrating the potential of the technology for what we term whole scene capture . We provide practical advice on software, hardware, camera usage, video processing, and ethical considerations; and introduce the 360-video qualitative coding technique of spherical simultaneous perspective . Adding new evidence of its use to already established literatures on 360-degree immersive video ethnographies and virtual human-environment exposure research, our method for systematic 360-degree capture of spatio-temporal data is applicable to a range of social science studies with a field-based data collection component. Finally, drawing together technological understandings of immersion from the field of VR with its ethnographic meaning, we then articulate the notion of immersive holism as a quality of 360-degree video that enables deep, meaningful, and comprehensive knowledge of place.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.014
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.748
GPT teacher head0.694
Teacher spread0.054 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Qualitative MethodsSame topicFocus Groups and Qualitative MethodsFrench-language works237,207