MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W651698694 · doi:10.1108/s0163-2396201544

Contributions from European Symbolic Interactionists: Reflections on Methods

2015· book· en· W651698694 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thaddeus Müller

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistemologySociologyComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The papers in this volume were presented in at the third conference of the European society for the study of symbolic interaction (SSSI). The theme of the 2012 conference was "Conflict, cooperation and transformation in everyday life. The fifteen papers presented across this volume and volume 45 cover a diverse range of topics, which are divided into two main categories: "Reflections on Methods" and "Conflict and Cooperation", this volume focuses on the former. The central issue of the first four papers is how we navigate our emotional, analytical and political selves in the social worlds that we study. How do we relate to those we observe and interview? How do we deal with issues of power, suffering and politics? The following three papers provide a critical analysis of Geertz' 'Thick Description', perspectives on obesity in modern society and an analysis of the relationship between police officers and licensed marijuana coffee shop owners in Rotterdam. Contributing authors to this volume and the next come from Belgium, Canada, Sweden, the US, the Netherlands and Germany, suggesting the thriving diversity of European SSSI in terms of its research themes and methods

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)0.094
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0940.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0160.042
Scholarly communication0.0290.027
Open science0.0030.021
Research integrity0.0070.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.257
GPT teacher head0.614
Teacher spread0.357 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicObesity and Health PracticesFrench-language works237,207