MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067025046 · doi:10.1177/0095798412454675

Toward an African Definition of Resilience

2012· article· en· W2067025046 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Linda Theron, Adam M. C. Theron, Macalane Junel Malindi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Black Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsConceptualizationContext (archaeology)PsychologyPsychological resilienceQualitative researchResilience (materials science)Exploratory researchGrounded theorySociologyCollectivismSocial psychologySocial sciencePolitical scienceGeographyIndividualism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resilience, or adaptive behavior in the face of adversity, has recently come to be understood as a phenomenon that should not be uniformly conceptualized across contexts and cultures. This emerging understanding has urged exploration of what resilience might mean in specific cultural contexts. As in other majority nation contexts, there is scant documentation of what resilience might mean in an African context. In this article, the authors report on an exploratory qualitative study, rooted in a constructivist grounded theory approach, in which 11 South African adults from an impoverished rural area were invited to provide a description of resilient Basotho youth. In contrast to Eurocentric perspectives, their descriptions, verbal, written, and hand-drawn, offer an Africentric understanding of resilience. This emerging African conceptualization of resilience advocates for deeper exploration of collectivist philosophies underpinning Black youth resilience and continued research into the process of African resilience.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.016
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations132
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Black PsychologySame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207