MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2266947283 · doi:10.29173/cjfy27144

Democratically Engaged Youth: Countering the Framing and Containing of Youth in Popular Discourses

2016· article· en· W2266947283 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
R Varainja Stock

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la Jeunesse · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)Youth studiesPositive Youth DevelopmentCitizen journalismPoliticsYouth participationSocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceGender studiesPsychologyPublic relationsDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Youth is an unstable demographic encompassing an increasing age range, and popularly imbued with innate negative characteristics. Youth are often negatively portrayed and youth status invoked to suggest an inability to responsibly engage as citizens in order to undermine the impact of youths’ positive political participation. They are constructed as violent, lacking positive coping skills, and apathetic. These negative constructions reinforce youth as on the margins of society, unable to responsibly participate as citizens. Despite popular negative portrayals some researchers have demonstrated the many ways youth are politically and socially engaged. Youth are engaged where they find meaning and feel they can have an impact. From organized activism through transformational resistance, and participatory action research projects youth are engaging in creative ways to shape the world they live in.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.030
Scholarly communication0.0130.009
Open science0.0020.019
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la JeunesseSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207