How (Un)Aware are Young People in Serbia and the Diaspora of Serbia’s Intangible Cultural Heritage?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is the result of work on the project “A Study of Awareness and Preservation of Intangible Cultural Heritage Among Young People in Serbia and the Diaspora” carried out in 2019. In view of the UNESCO recommendations that young people should be educated about the importance of cultural heritage as they are the key population in the process of its further preservation, the project was conceived with the aim of conducting a survey on the awareness of young people in Serbia and the diaspora of elements of intangible cultural heritage (ICH) protected in the National Register of ICH of the Republic of Serbia. A target group for the study was selected using the technique of nonprobability sampling, composed of a convenience sample of young people who are members of cultural societies in Novi Sad, Zrenjanin, Užice, Kraljevo and Niš, and also of third-generation Serbian immigrants in Vienna, Paris and Calgary who are members of Serbian cultural societies in these cities. Taking into account the fact that in cultural societies certain elements of ICH are practiced and learned, the hypothesis was that the target group would serve as a good indicator of the degree of awareness of protected elements of ICH on the national list, as most protected elements constitute rare customs. Related to this is the fundamental analytical question, namely, who does the ICH National List serve and who should be aware of the protected rare elements of intangible cultural heritage, to what degree and why. The research instrument used was a questionnaire with open-ended questions, and the data thus collected were consequently supplemented through interviews. Ten elements were selected from the ICH National List. 66 completed questionnaires were collected, 33 from Serbia and 33 from the diaspora. An analysis of the replies suggests that the degree of awareness among young people of ICH is relatively low.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".