MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

To Engage Research Critically : A Review of Kerry Howell ’s The Philosophy of Methodology

2015· review· en· W795765405 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Qualitative Report · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDutch Social and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistemologySociologyDeskFeminismPhilosophy of scienceQualitative researchSocial researchSocial sciencePhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The turn to philosophical grounding in qualitative research demands a depth of historical and conceptual knowledge that many trained in the social sciences may lack. Kerry Howell ’ s A Philosophy of Methodology is a concise and useful guide to the key developments in Western epistemology then linking philosophical thought to social theory and paradigm of inquiry. For the novice researcher or graduate student, this book is an excellent desk reference, however there are several omissions, including feminism, which renders it a less - than - complete guide to the role of epistemology in social science inquiry.

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)0.105
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1050.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.888
GPT teacher head0.731
Teacher spread0.157 · 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