MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125456802 · doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101494

Technologies for fostering intergenerational connectivity and relationships: Scoping review and emergent concepts

2021· article· en· W3125456802 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology in Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLScopusPsychological interventionInclusion (mineral)VocabularyPsychologyProcess (computing)MEDLINESociologySocial psychologyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing capabilities of technology are enabling increased support for communication and meaningful interactions that span distance, cultures, and generations. Interactions between youth (people younger than 19 years old) and older adults (people over 50 years old) have been shown to provide many benefits for both populations. Technology has a significant potential role to play in supporting intergenerational connectivity, however, little research has been done to specifically explore what role technology might have. This scoping review examines the literature to establish what technologies have been created or used to foster intergenerational interactions to infer overarching themes and propose directions for future research. A structured search was conducted through MEDLINE (PubMed), IEEE, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), ACM, and Scopus databases. Identified articles were screened first by title, then by abstract, and finally by full paper screening. Inclusion criteria were: written in English, contained both youth below 21 and adults over 50 years of age, peer-reviewed primary research (e.g. journal and conference publications) or published theses/dissertations, and presented design or use of a technology with the specific intention of fostering intergenerational connectivity. An inductive analysis was performed to identify emergent concepts related to the reviewed literature. A total of 36, 707 articles were identified; 77 were included in the review after the screening process. Five emergent concepts were identified: 1) Technology for intergenerational connectivity is an emerging field, 2) Interventions are primarily games-focused, 3) Research has been discipline-centric, 4) Lack of consistent vocabulary, and 5) Lack of consistent methodologies. This review is the first of its kind to scope the body of research related to technology fostering intergenerational connectivity. The breadth of methods reflects the new and multidisciplinary nature of this field and underscores the importance of creating shared approaches and vocabulary to increase knowledge sharing. This, in turn, could support more rapid and targeted progress in this field.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.312 · 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