MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139899687 · doi:10.1080/13676261.2011.623689

Examining citizenship participation in young Australian adults: a structural equation analysis

2011· article· en· W2139899687 on OpenAlexaff
Polly Yeung, Anne Passmore, Tanya Packer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Youth Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersAustralian Research CouncilMassey University
KeywordsCitizenshipStructural equation modelingCivic engagementPoliticsSociologySocial engagementSocial psychologySubject (documents)Variance (accounting)PsychologyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As citizens, young adults should be supported and encouraged to enact their basic rights and responsibilities to partake in decision-making that affects their lives and development. Recent studies in several Western countries, including Australia, have suggested that levels of political and community activities among young adults have significantly decreased. This study tested a theoretically and empirically based explanatory model of citizenship participation on 434 young Australian adults to examine how the variables of social milieu, citizen communication networks, self-efficacy and life satisfaction contributed to citizenship participation (social and civic activities). Structural equation modelling corroborated a meditational model in which citizen communication networks and social milieu accounted for significant variance in self-efficacy and life satisfaction which in turn accounted for social and civic participation. Results demonstrated that citizenship participation is influenced by the social environment, which is multidimensional and the person–environment interaction is subject to ongoing changes. Young adults' social contexts are important socialising agents that promote citizenship participation.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.111 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Youth StudiesSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207