MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046745020 · doi:10.5539/res.v7n8p246

Axiological Analysis of Intergenerational Relations in a Globalized Society: Myth and Reality

2015· article· en· W2046745020 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
С. Л. Шалаева, Anastasia V. Shalaeva

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobalization and Cultural Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research University Higher School of Economics
KeywordsPhenomenonMythologySociologyContemporary societyDynamics (music)Social relationSocial transformationSocial changeEpistemologySocial sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the phenomenon of intergenerational relations in contemporary society. The model of intergenerational relations is the basic model of individuals’ social behavior, generations’ relationship and other social communities; it influences the social dynamics in general. The research explores the growing crisis of these relations and social metamorphoses caused by the nowadays society’s dynamic changes. These changes are associated primarily with the transformation of the contemporary person’s values and worldview with the advent and development of the new media. The analysis of the changes suggests the prefigurative nature of contemporary culture, as evidenced by recent studies of mimetic and ritual behavior of today’s children. The article discusses the phenomenon of Indigo children, as a particular confirmation of the crisis of intergenerational relations.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.023
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicGlobalization and Cultural IdentityFrench-language works237,207