MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2477804275 · doi:10.1080/01490400.2016.1203846

“I Like My Peeps”: Diversifying the Net Generation's Digital Leisure

2016· article· en· W2477804275 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bronwen L. Valtchanov, Diana C. Parry

Bibliographic record

VenueLeisure Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationInteractivityThe InternetSociologyImmigrationSociology of leisureInterpersonal communicationPublic relationsPolitical scienceMultimediaSocial scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current generation of adolescents is the first to have grown up with the widespread use of the internet as part of their everyday lives; they are the Net Generation. To diversify existing research on this generation's digital practices, this study explored the intersectional experiences of diverse immigrant adolescent girls' digital leisure. Conversational interviews with nine girls revealed that they encountered numerous interpersonal leisure constraints following their immigration to Canada. Within their digital leisure, girls were able to negotiate these constraints through online connections with family and friends back home, Canadian friends, and the global village. These online connections facilitated an expansion of social boundaries and communication with both familiar and broad networks to maintain and develop relationships, pursue interests, share culture, and resist limiting gendered norms with the unparalleled interactivity and sociability of digital leisure.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.307
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 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

Citations31
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeisure SciencesSame topicRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness ManagementFrench-language works237,207