MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101121034 · doi:10.1093/hsw/25.2.127

The NIMBY Phenomenon: Community Residents' Concerns about Housing for Deinstitutionalized People

2000· article· en· W2101121034 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth & Social Work · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University InstituteDouglas College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNIMBYOpposition (politics)Naturalistic observationQualitative researchSociologyPhenomenonPublic relationsCommunity integrationNaturalismPsychologySocial psychologyMedicinePolitical scienceSocial scienceLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reports the findings of a study on community opposition to group homes in Montreal, Canada. This qualitative study set out to explore the underlying dynamics of what happens when a community rejects a group home. With the use of a naturalistic paradigm, three actual incidents of community opposition were studied. Nineteen interviews were conducted with community residents, elected officials, and group home developers. Community residents did not support deinstitutionalization and social integration policies and argued against group homes. The findings of this study, never reported before in previous research, have important implications for social workers and social planners.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0350.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.359 · 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