MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201577716 · doi:10.1002/jcop.22702

Subjective housing stability in the transition away from homelessness

2021· article· en· W3201577716 on OpenAlexaff
Tyler Frederick, Nina Vitopoulos, Scott Leon, Sean A. Kidd

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Psychology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWellesley InstituteCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStability (learning theory)Construct (python library)Subjective well-beingPsychologySet (abstract data type)Social psychologyFeelingCognitive psychologyComputer scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Housing stability is a complex concept to measure. One set of factors under consideration are those based on a personal or subjective sense of stability. We explore the variables associated with subjective stability and explore how subjective stability relates to housing stability across time. We use data from longitudinal, mixed methods research with 85 young people exiting homelessness. We find that subjective stability is a meaningful construct that can be validated through qualitative and quantitative data. The construct is primarily linked to indicators of environmental and social wellbeing. Subjective stability is also one of the only variables with a significant relationship to T2 housing stability. Qualitative analysis is used to explore these relationships in more detail. We conclude that subjective stability can provide holistic insight into the complex life circumstances influencing housing stability. However, this strength introduces complexity in that subjective stability appears to be developed in comparison with past experiences, as well as feelings of forward momentum on goals beyond housing.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community PsychologySame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207