MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7064422732

Combining historical and ethnographic methods: Theoretical, methodological, and ethical implications

2024· other· en· W7064422732 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueKölner Universitäts PublikationsServer (Universität zu Köln) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectrical and Electromagnetic Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubject (documents)EthnographyGovernment (linguistics)Circumstantial evidenceField (mathematics)Work (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This working paper discusses theoretical, methodological, and ethical questions researchers encounter when combining historical and ethnographic research approaches. In 2021, a group of historians and cultural and social anthropologists formed the interdisciplinary working group Entanglements of Historical and Ethnographic Research (Approaches). The group members share an interest in combining historical and anthropological research methods and approaches. This publication is a result of their discussions. The working paper contains contributions by Susanne Fehlings (Frobenius Institute/Goethe University Frankfurt), Oliver Tappe (University of Heidelberg), Lena Rüßing (Head Office of the German Science and Humanities Council), Ole Münch (German Historical Institute London), Sofie Steinberger (University of Cologne), and Gerda Kuiper (University of Cologne). Based on the fields of ethnohistory, historical anthropology as well as oral history and archival research within the field of historical research, the contributions show that anthropologists and historians face similar methodological challenges and encounter comparable questions and uncertainties during the research process. The papers address topics such as the use of the histoire croisée approach for anthropologists, ethnographic multi-sited archival fieldwork, various aspects of oral history research in terms of positionality, power structures, language use and secondary analysis of interviews, as well as remote data collection. Although the contributions focus on very individual subject matters related to the research topics of the group members and although the contributors have carried out research in different regions (the Caucasus, Laos, Canada, the United Kingdom, Morocco, and Tanzania), they also share similar concerns and interests. Questions and concerns addressed throughout the working paper are the question how to give voice to marginalized people, the role of historiography in contested and exclusionary processes of nation-building (and the question how researchers can avoid contributing to such nationalist discourses through their historical research), and the opportunities and pitfalls of a researcher’s remoteness in time and space. We hope our discussions of such questions and concerns in this working paper are helpful for other researchers working on the interface of history and anthropology.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.297 · 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