Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To understand ageing well, one needs to study not only those who are ageing but also the places within and with which people are ageing. In the past, much ageing‐well research has been focused on ensuring individuals have the “right” resources and are engaged in the “best” types of activities. However, recent theorizing has prompted the study of ageing well as a process of making sense of self amid later‐life changes. Building on Rowles' attachment‐to‐place work, the purpose of this paper is to consider how the “thick concreteness” of place influences later‐life meaning making. Design/methodology/approach This is a theoretical paper on ageing. Findings The paper draws on Casey's phenomenological conceptualization of places as imprinting themselves on bodies and selves, much as humans shape the places they inhabit. Data from interviews with older rural women in western Canada illustrates how this conceptualization can enhance understanding of ageing well relative to place as a physical, socio‐cultural and temporal phenomenon. In a place that has been depicted as inhospitable, participants have chosen to stay even as practically invisible kin and community “keepers” on the “frontier”. Originality/value This original paper suggests that to age well is to age locally and to make sense not only for self about self and one's own ageing but also for ageing in mutually compatible ways in that place.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".