Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian sociologist Dorothy Smith said, in the idea of "the everyday world as problematic", that everyday world has opacity that can only be partially explicated from inside of it. The everyday everynight world of our contemporary society is never self-subsistent and is articulated in various ways to a complex of coordinated actions that transcends local particularities. Smith sees "the social" as people's ongoing activities coordinated with activities of others. She then focuses on the distinctive form of coordination of what people are doing that are reproduced over and over again. Smith's Institutional Ethnography is a method of sociological inquiry. It explores how local settings of people's everyday life are connected to and are regulated by extended social relations that are not directly visible from inside of these settings. The distinctive form that generalizes the coordination of people's actions is in itself socially organized in and through people's local practices. This paper considers her discussion of the power of institutions in order to deepen our understanding of Smith's idea. According to her argument, the power is tied to textually mediated discourse. This paper discusses this issue by focusing on the people's work that creates "textual reality" in institutional processes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".