MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021920952 · doi:10.1300/j074v12n03_06

Older Women's Body Image and Embodied Experience: An Exploration

2000· article· en· W2021920952 on OpenAlex
Laura Hurd Clarke

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

VenueJournal of Women & Aging · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeautyEmbodied cognitionFeelingAttractivenessPsychologyPerceptionNaturalnessConstruct (python library)Human physical appearanceObjectificationSocial psychologyPhysical attractivenessFocus groupDevelopmental psychologyAestheticsSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents and analyzes findings from unstructured interviews with women aged 61 to 92 regarding their perceptions and feelings about their aging bodies. The data are discussed in light of the existing literature on women's body image which has largely ignored the experiences of women in later life and which has tended to focus on adolescent and middle-aged women. Given the fact that beauty is equated with youthfulness and thinness in our society, older women face unique challenges as they strive to construct and maintain positive evaluations of self. The women in the study exhibit the internalization of ageist beauty norms even as they assert that health is more important to them than physical attractiveness and comment on the 'naturalness' of the aging process.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.311 · 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