MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2176970753 · doi:10.1093/geronb/gbv103

Alone at the Table: Food Behavior and the Loss of Commensality in Widowhood: Table 1.

2015· article· en· W2176970753 on OpenAlexaff
Elisabeth Vesnaver, Heather Keller, Olga Sutherland, Scott B. Maitland, Julie L. Locher

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series B · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooResearch Institute for Aging
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsPleasureGrounded theoryMealPsychologyGerontologyVulnerability (computing)Food choiceQualitative researchPortion sizeSocial psychologySociologyMedicineFood scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Eating alone is a known risk factor for nutritional vulnerability in later life. Widowhood often entails loss of commensality (shared meals). This article explores this experience among older widowed women in relation to food behavior. METHOD: Qualitative methods based on constructivist grounded theory were used. Interviews were conducted with 15 women living alone in the community, aged 71 to 86 years, and widowed 6 months to 15 years. RESULTS: Widowhood meant having significantly fewer opportunities for commensality. Participants attributed changes to their food behaviors to the loss of commensality, including food choice, fewer regular meals, and reduced work of meal preparation. These changes were attributed to the experienced difference between shared meals and meals eaten alone, no longer having the commitment of commensality, and having less interest in meal preparation in the absence of obligation or reward of commensality. DISCUSSION: Eating alone symbolized loss and was less enjoyable, yet the pleasure experienced with food was intact. Focusing on the pleasure of eating may help support women when they lose regular commensality late in life. Free from the commitment of commensality, some shifted away from regular meals and simplified their meal preparation strategies. This has implications for clinical and research endeavors.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations78
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series BSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207