MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2977202276 · doi:10.14288/1.0378853

"Playing with monopoly money" : a participatory exploration of the space-time aspects of homeless social capital

2019· article· en· W2977202276 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shelley Cook

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonopolySocial capitalSpace (punctuation)Social spaceCitizen journalismCapital (architecture)BusinessEconomicsSociologyLabour economicsComputer scienceGeographyMicroeconomicsSocial scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social capital is generally understood as the benefits received through people’s relationship with others. Although social capital is recognized as a fundamental ingredient in the psychological and material wellbeing of all people, little is known about how it functions for the homeless. Even less is known about context-sensitive accounts that consider the relevance of space and time in the production of social capital, the connection to the construction of homeless identity, and how social capital experiences of homeless people vary based on different factors, including gender. My doctoral research is an exploratory, participatory investigation of the space-time aspects of homeless social capital and the relationship to the trajectory of homelessness. It furthers theoretical and practical knowledge of homelessness, social capital, and the influence of gender through the use of Bourdieusian social capital theory and multiple methods and data sources. My research was conducted in Kelowna, BC, a mid-sized Canadian city, and involved one-year of fieldwork with time spent on city streets in locations known to be pivotal hubs of homeless activity. I conducted participatory mapping on an individual-basis with 29 street homeless adults, and on a group-basis with participants separated through a female/male binary. I used an advisory committee composed of formerly homeless people to guide research and interviews with key stakeholders with knowledge of street homelessness locally to inform my research approach. As a way to enhance policy and service recommendations, focus groups with key stakeholders and the advisory committee for the project were used to leverage research findings. Three key areas of findings were identified: 1) six distinct categories of homeless social capital with defined geographies, temporal aspects, and gender profiles; 2) three categories of fixed or variable factors with gender being the most important in shaping the space-time aspects of homeless social capital; and, 3) key themes from the thematic analysis of qualitative data, including the prevalence of negative social capital, the conscious performance of representations of homeless identity, and pronounced gender differences in the space-time aspects of social capital, including gendered survival and resistance strategies. The many theoretical, methodological, and practical implications are discussed.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0280.035
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0040.016
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicHomelessness and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→