MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7054863247

Artists in Malta : myth to method

2023· report· en· W7054863247 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOAR@UM (University of Malta) · 2023
Typereport
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChampionMythologyThe artsCreative industriesQuarter (Canadian coin)HandicraftCreativityPosition (finance)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is one of a number of initiatives undertaken by the Arts Council Malta (ACM) in an effort to map the working conditions of artistic, creative and cultural (ACC) practitioners in Malta. It is driven by the ACM's commitment to champion the advancement of the status of artists, and other cultural and creative practitioners, and to support the professional development of the creative sector through evidence-based research. The study employs a statistical analysis of the data captured by the Malta National Statistics Office Creative & Cultural Practice Survey, where 1,019 persons completed a Computer Assisted Telephone Interview during the last quarter of 2019. The study reveals that around one in five respondents in Malta consider themselves to be artists, a ratio that resonates with similar studies. Strong associations are found between self-assessment and more objective descriptors, lending weight to the position that it is plausible to rely on self-assessment to identify artists in Malta - albeit an imperfect proxy. If artists are to be defined by any other single metric (such as being formally trained, belonging to an ACC organisation, or even earning a living from the arts), then the percentage of people who can be considered as artists would be smaller. If all ACC practitioners were to be included in the definition of artist, then the number of artists would double. Artists are more likely to be in employment, have a higher education, and are more likely to be male than the general population. The study also reveals that artists report a higher-than-average level of life satisfaction. Strong links between art and wellbeing are found among those practicing on behalf of a voluntary organisation. Furthermore, artists who apply their skills at work report a good work-life balance. On the theme of family and society, the study finds that one is more likely to find artists still living with parents, which may be partly explained by the slightly younger average age of artists versus the rest of the population. In terms of social engagement, only around a third of self-assessed artists stated that they practiced their activity on behalf of an organisation during the last 12 months, with the majority being women. Artists who practice on behalf of an organisation, are more likely to say that they feel public recognition for their work. Only around a fourth of self-assessed artists are VAT-registered and even fewer (around a fifth) enjoy any paid hours for their ACC activity. Many of those whose practice supports them financially are teachers within their ACC field. The study finds that one in two artists are able to practice their ACC activity thanks to the support of their main employment. Both time and finance appear to be a constraint for several artists and most artists would increase the number of hours spent on artistic practice if money were no issue. These findings and others detailed in the report that follows, should be interesting to policy-makers, practitioners, sponsors, researchers and other stakeholders. In particular, they may help the ACM to identify structural issues that need to be addressed in order to support the growth of sector and practitioners in their ACC work.

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)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0060.010
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.005

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOAR@UM (University of Malta)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207