MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885816228

Rowe와 Kahn의 성공적 노화 개념: 문화적 요소의 결여

2014· article· ko· W2885816228 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
어윤경

Bibliographic record

Venue한국사회복지조사연구 · 2014
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsROWEEconomicsManagement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

본 연구는 Rowe와 Kahn(1997)이 제시한 성공적 노화의 개념 발달의 근간과 그 개념의 틀을 고찰하고, Rowe와 Kahn의 성공적 노화 개념이 한 개인이 속해있는 문화적 배경을 고려하지 않는 한계를 가지고 있음을 주장한다. 캐나다의 이뉴잇족(Inuit), 보츠와나의 산족(!Kung) 및 홍콩의 중국인을 대상으로 수행한 인류학 연구들에 대한 검토를 통해서, 성공적 노화에 대한 이해와 의미 부여가 문화적 배경에 따라 다름을 확인하였고, Rowe와 Kahn의 성공적 노화 개념으로는 설명될 수 없는 부분이 있음을 밝혔다. 이에 본 연구에서는 Rowe와 Kahn의 성공적 노화 개념을 수정·보완하여 기존 개념의 틀이 지녔던 문화적 한계를 극복할 수 있는 방안을 제시하고, 본 연구의 정책적, 실천적 함의를 제시하였다.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.025
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue한국사회복지조사연구Same topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207