MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2734184211 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igx004.4898

AGEING, THE DIGITAL AND EVERYDAY LIFE

2017· article· en· W2734184211 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wendy Martin, Barbara Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEveryday lifeGeneral partnershipNarrativeSociologyPublic relationsInformation and Communications TechnologyPolitical scienceMedia studiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 21st century has been characterised by a proliferation of digital devices, information technologies and mediated systems of communication within global and networked societies. Developments in digital technologies increasingly permeate everyday life and are interwoven with our identities, narratives, social relationships, social networks, lifestyles and societies. Digital technologies are, moreover, having profound influences within the lives of people in mid to later life. The aim of this symposium is to critically explore perceptions, experiences and roles that digital devices, information technologies and mediated systems of communication may have in the lives of people as they grow older. The symposium will further consider: (1) the opportunities and possibilities that people in mid to later life have to engage with and resist digital technologies in everyday life; and (2) how narratives surrounding engagement (or not) with digital technologies both challenge and reinforce ideas about ageing (and youth) in complex and, at times, contradictory ways. The papers from this symposium are drawn from an international partnership funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) entitled Ageing, Communication, Technology (ACT): experiencing a digital world in later life. ACT is a multi-methodological research project over 7 years (2014–2021) that brings together researchers and institutional and community partners to address the transformation of the experiences of ageing with the proliferation of new forms of mediated communications in networked societies. ACT is comprised of an interdisciplinary network of researchers, students, and community and institutional partners from around the world.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.012
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0000.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207