MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2213625183 · doi:10.5539/jel.v5n1p1

Impact of the Digital Divide on Computer Use and Internet Access on the Poor in Nigeria

2015· article· en· W2213625183 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Omolara Tayo, Randall C. Thompson, Elizabeth Clare Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetDigital divideInternet accessPovertyLocal government areaGovernment (linguistics)Computer literacyOgun stateLocal governmentBusinessInternet privacyEconomic growthPolitical scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide WebPublic administrationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>We recruited 20 community members in Ido Local Government Area, Oyo state and Yewa Local Government Area, Ogun state in Nigeria to explore experiences and perceptions of Internet access and computer use. Face-to-face interviews were conducted using open-ended questions to collect qualitative data regarding accessibility of information and communication technology. Twenty low-income community members volunteered to participate in the study. The results centered around affordability of computers and Internet access, exposure to information on the Internet, increasing access to the Internet, training on computer use, benefits for job searching, and networking. The results indicated the lack of Internet access, affordability of computers and Internet usage, poverty, lack of computer skills, and poor infrastructures were contributors to the digital divide.</p>

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations54
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicICT Impact and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207