De-myth-tifying the gender digital divide in Latin America: libraries as intermediaries in bridging the gap
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For decades, the gender digital divide has been observed as a concept and a construct throughout countries all over the world. It persists with particular belligerence in areas like Latin America, where myths surrounding its existence have perpetuated disparities in men’s and women’s access to and use of the internet and information and communications technologies (ICTs). In this paper, the author reveals that in order for the gender digital divide to be rectified, it must first be ‘de-myth-tified’, and claims about the divide as nonexistent, unimportant, or due to women’s inherent technophobia systematically discredited. It is then argued that, by exposing the true nature of the divide, spaces are created for libraries to take on a new role in Latin America, as advocates for gender equality in technology and information. Possibilities for improving policy, education, and innovation are explored, with a call for further research in the field. Second Place DJIM Best Article Award.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it