How Creativity and the Arts Enhanced the Life of a Chinese Elderly Immigrant in Canada: A Shared Exploration of a Life Lived Fully
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How do creativity and the arts have positive influence on the aging process of a Chinese elderly immigrant in Canada? Fisher and Specht (as cited in Reynolds, 2010) suggested that visual art making in later life contributes to the older adults’ well-being in several ways, such as gaining a sense of achievement, purpose in life, and connection with others. In this thesis, I describe my conversations with a 94-year old Chinese senior who is fully engaged in the arts and creative activities, and explore her perception of the positive effects that arts have on her as she ages. Research on aging has indicated that older people who are engaged in activities that provide them with a sense of mastery have more positive health outcomes (as cited in Cohen, 2006). Feeling a sense of mastery in an area results in a sense of control of one’s self, which leads to an increased feelings of empowerment. Art activities help to keep the elders’ minds challenged thus make their brains healthier (Cohen, 2006). Art-making process allows older adults to express emotions, which in turn can be healing, satisfying, and meaningful (Rugh, 1991). Older people are vulnerable to social isolation and restrictions in doing activities, particularly those who are in poor health. Engaging in the arts helps them to maintain their value as a person in the world and to stay closely connected to the rest of the world, instead of being stereotyped by age or disability (Reynolds, 2010).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".