The Active Role of Material Things: An Environment-Based Conceptual Framework to Understand the Well-Being of People with Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study discusses the relationships of material things to people with dementia and proposes the development of material environments to enhance their well-being. Integrating research on well-being from existential, ecological, and place-based perspectives, this study develops a new understanding of the well-being of people with dementia when considering the active role of material things in the process of developing well-being. “Well-being of people with dementia” refers to the awareness of self-existence in a real-world environment established by the interactions of people and material things. Based on this understanding, this study integrates four types of environmental embodiments, including obliviousness, watching, noticing, and heightened contact, providing specific guides to understand people’s associations with their material environments. An environment-based conceptual framework, based on the new understanding of the meanings of well-being and its association with material things, allows designers and professional/family caregivers to understand the lived experiences of people with dementia, in order to enhance the well-being of their clients and their families by using material things to create a more holistic environment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".