MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2557282472 · doi:10.15353/joci.v12i3.3281

Perceptions of ICT use in rural Brazil: Factors that impact appropriation among marginalized communities

2016· article· es· W2557282472 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Paola Prado, J. Alejandro Tirado-Alcaraz, Mauro Araújo Câmara

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppropriationInformation and Communications TechnologyDigital inclusionHumanitiesICTSDigital literacyDigital divideSociologyPolitical scienceGeographyPedagogyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study of digital inclusion among the rural poor examines how residents of remote mountain communities in Brazil perceive the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs). It analyzes social factors that impact ICT appropriation and the behaviors and attitudes that advance digital literacy among marginalized rural populations. The authors conducted factor analysis and logistic regressions to survey data collected. Results confirm the presence of a gender divide in ICT adoption. Women were more likely to perceive that ICT use brings social benefits to the community, and considered that ICTs provide better opportunities for the young.Este estudio sobre inclusión digital entre los pobres en comunidades rurales examina cómo es que los residentes de comunidades serranas remotas en Brasil perciben el uso de la las tecnologías de la información y comunicación (TICs). Analiza los factores sociales que impactan la apropiación de TIC, así como el comportamiento y las actitudes que permiten el avance de la alfabetización digital en poblaciones rurales marginalizadas. Los autores realizaron un análisis factorial y regresiones logísticas de la información recolectada a través de encuestas. Los resultados confirman la presencia de una brecha de género en la adopción de TIC. Las mujeres son más propensas a percibir que el uso de ICT trae beneficios sociales para la comunidad, y también consideraron que las TICs proporcionan mejores oportunidades para los jóvenes.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Community InformaticsSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207