MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011836164 · doi:10.1068/b2761t

Age-Segregated and Gated Retirement Communities in the Third Age: The Differential Contribution of Place — Community to Self-Actualization

2002· article· en· W2011836164 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ivan Townshend

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning B Planning and Design · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariate statisticsPsychologyContext (archaeology)Self-actualizationDifferential (mechanical device)CognitionCongruence (geometry)Social psychologyMultivariate analysisDevelopmental psychologyGerontologyGeographyMedicineMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author focuses on the role of place-based community both in in-situ aging and in age-segregated (often gated and walled) retirement villages within cities as a potential contributor towards self-actualization. Elderly individuals in a case study in Calgary, Alberta, were measured on the short index of self actualization and a series of multivariate ‘structures’ of place — community associated with behavioral, cognitive, and affective features of community derived from a principal components analysis of community indicator variables. Self-actualization tendencies were not found to differ by residential context. Multiple regression models showed a similar overall contribution of all community structures to self-actualization in the different residential contexts, but different sets of community structures were identified as unique and significant predictors of self-actualization in the two residential settings. This differential impact may signal that a variety of forms and structures of person–environment congruence amongst the elderly yield similar psychological outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning B Planning and DesignSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207