Assisted living facilities as sites of encounter: implications for older adults’ experiences of inclusion and exclusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Most of the existing literature on inclusion and exclusion among older adults focuses on community-dwelling individuals. In this article, we draw on the results of a comparative case study to explore how older adults in two assisted living settings experience inclusion and exclusion. One site was a low-income facility and the other a higher-end facility in a mid-sized Canadian city. Bridging together geographies of encounter and gerontological approaches on social inclusion, we analyse interviews with tenants and key informants to explore when, where and in what ways these groups experience inclusion and exclusion in these particular settings. Tenants’ narratives reveal how their encounters, and in turn their experiences of exclusion and inclusion are shaped by experiences throughout their lifecourse, the organisation of assisted living spaces, communities beyond the facility, and pervasive discourses of ageism and ‘dementiaism’. We argue that addressing experiences of exclusion for older adults within these settings involves making more time and space for positive encounters and addressing pervasive discourses around ageism and ‘dementiaism’ among tenants and staff.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".