Wool and needles in my casket : knitting as habit among rural Newfoundland women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis examines the motives and meanings behind the actions of female knitters in rural Newfoundland. This is done from a Weberian standpoint. -- This research will present the findings from a survey conducted in April 1999, and subsequent interviews done in June and July 1999. The population that is under investigation consists of Newfoundlanders who knit for Newfoundland Outport Nursing and Industrial Association (NONIA). This organisation is a non-profit cottage industry. One will see the general characteristics of NONIA knitters, and what they perceive to be the motivations and meanings attached to the knitting they do. -- It will be established that while the knitters in this research get paid for their knitting, monetary reward is not the main motivating factor. This research shows that the necessity of having a learned activity to pass time and to maintain a coherent self is the prime motivator, and meaning, behind knitting. For many rural Newfoundland women, knitting has developed into a habit that is intertwined into many aspects of their lives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".