MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033033234 · doi:10.5195/aa.2013.17

Activist Pensioners, a Contradiction in Terms? Argentina’s Jubilados

2013· article· en· W2033033234 on OpenAlexafffund
Lindsay DuBois

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropology & Aging · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsContradictionEmbodied cognitionGrandparentPoliticsGender studiesSociologyFront (military)Political sciencePolitical economySocial movementLawGeographyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Why does it seem unlikely that retirees should be political activists? What does that reaction say about our understandings of retirement and of activism? This article examines the experience of a group of older activists who, among other things, rally weekly in front of the National Congress in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and have done so for more than two decades. Regardless of advanced age and infirmity, these men and women, some in their eighties and nineties, refuse to be defined as passive by their roles as retirees and grandparents. After examining some of the tensions embodied in the idea of activist pensioners, this article proceeds to look at the pensioners’ own understandings of where their activism comes from and what sustains it. Situating the pensioners’ struggle in broader historical processes in Argentina illuminates their motives and strategies. The article thus also demonstrates that a historical approach provides a productive strategy for analysing elder social movements.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropology & AgingSame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207