Større brugerindflydelse indenfor redaktionelt styrede rammer - Om koblingen af et journalistisk magasin og et brugerdrevet community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artiklen beskriver community’et input.refleXx.dk, der i 2010 indgik som en del af et forsknings- og udviklingsprojekt med blandt andet det formål at undersøge community’ets potentiale til at bidrage med værdiskabende brugerindlæg i det tilknyttede magasin refleXx.dk samt generere input til magasinjournalisternes idé- og researchfase.Med udgangspunkt i Alex Bruns begreb gatewatching diskuteres her, hvorvidt den tætte kobling af community og magasin formår at give brugerne større indflydelse indenfor rammerne af et redaktionelt styret og produceret journalistisk produkt. Det vurderes, at brugere gerne bidrager aktivt som medproducenter og informationssamlere motiveret af muligheden for at påvirke indholdet i et medie. Hos de deltagende journalister synes barrieren for at deltage i og udnytte den åbne samtale med brugerne på community’et derimod større. Artiklen påpeger mulige årsager til denne tilbageholdenhed, herunder de uartikulerede rutiner og metoder samt den selvforståelse som producent og gatekeeper, der udspringer af journalistikkens produktionslogik.
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 | 0.012 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.472 | 0.240 |
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".