Advancing children’s geographies through ‘grey areas’ of age and childhood
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Children’s Geographies actively engages with critical understandings of age‐based research. However, the concept of age is an uncritical entity in these studies fueled by western concepts of childhood. Demarcating age numerically runs the risk of measuring childhoods in the Majority Worlds with Minority World concepts that are not culturally sensitive, but also forecloses any innovations. Researchers often spend so long debating definitions and boundaries when it is often in the grey areas of scholarship and life that the most exciting events and outcomes occur. This review begins with navigating ‘grey areas of age’ from how it is often measured in spaces of conceptual ambiguity with regards to experiences of being in between formal definitions of childhood or ‘Children’s Geographies.’ This is elaborated upon from Eurocentric linages that have shaped the subfield of Children’s Geographies, and in which the subfield should continue shifting from to further decolonize Eurocentric research related to age and childhood. The paper ends by presenting ways of further advancing the subfield of Children’s Geographies through (inter)generational positioning concepts and new interdisciplinary life course studies that further nuances the social variable of age as a grey area in the subfield.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it