MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3188697740 · doi:10.1080/02681102.2021.1962234

Socioeconomic status and digital inequality: lessons from Cote D’Ivoire

2021· article· en· W3188697740 on OpenAlexaff
Bangaly Kaba, Peter Meso

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Technology for Development · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
FundersCouncil for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa
KeywordsContinuanceSocioeconomic statusDigital divideThe InternetContext (archaeology)InequalityDeveloping countryGovernment (linguistics)Empirical researchInternet accessBusinessEconomic growthPolitical scienceSociologyEconomicsPsychologySocial psychologyGeographyComputer sciencePopulationDemographyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the problem of digital inequality from a socioeconomic perspective by examining if socioeconomic status moderates the impacts of subjective norms and perceived behavioral control on Internet use continuance in a developing country context. The study sheds empirical light on the context of Internet use continuance by demonstrating that mere access to Internet-capable or Internet-connected personal computational devices is not a sufficient precondition for continued Internet use. Rather, Internet Use Continuance is a function of broader economic factors among them socioeconomic status, communal influence, and government influence. The study also reveals that the effect of subjective norms on Internet use continuance differs across socioeconomic groups. Therefore, policymakers ought to consider using specific and targeted mechanisms in bridging digital inequality, particularly in developing country contexts.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation Technology for DevelopmentSame topicICT Impact and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207