PRECARIOUSNESS, THE PRECARIAT, AND AGING: NEW DIRECTIONS IN CRITICAL GERONTOLOGY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Risk, insecurity, globalization, and the destabilization of the everyday lives of millions of peoples across many nation-states signals the need for a re-framing of old age and aging. With growing economic and health insecurities and inequalities in life expectancy, precarity differs by and across age, class, gender, race, ethnicity, (dis)ability, and nation/citizenship, along with intersectional dimensions. European, Canadian, and North American scholars apply the concept of ‘precariousness’ and ‘precarity’, as developed by Butler (2009) and Standing (2010) to research, policy and practice in social gerontology. Portacolone reports on ethnographic research on precariousness in US older adults living alone with Alzheimer’s Disease or mild cognitive impairment, applying micro, meso and macro theoretical and policy perspectives. Craciun’s qualitative study examines precariousness in the case of older immigrants in Germany, as they confront insecurity and exclusion from main-stream society in old age, whilst demonstrating the possibility of a positive old age. Estes and DiCarlo focus on precarity in old age austerity politics and policy, examining US social movements that are catalyzing political advocacy and digital spaces in pitched battles aimed at preserving the Welfare State versus the ‘Precariate State’. Phillipson and Grenier illuminate the disjuncture between (a) theories and policies emphasizing productivity/participation, and (b) the rise of a global political economy promoting risk/instability. All of the presentations will explore the extent to which the ‘reconstruction of the life course calls for new directions in gerontology and critical perspectives in particular.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".