MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200256748 · doi:10.1111/chso.12524

Agency in everyday life: An ethnography of the moral experiences of children and youth

2021· article· en· W4200256748 on OpenAlexafffund
Sophia Siedlikowski, Shauna Van Praagh, Meaghan Shevell, Franco A. Carnevale

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren & Society · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Children's Hospital
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)EthnographyMoral agencySociologyContext (archaeology)Everyday lifeChildhood studiesSocial psychologyExpression (computer science)Affect (linguistics)Gender studiesDevelopmental psychologyPsychologyEpistemologySocial scienceAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Drawing on a hermeneutic ethnographic methodology, we studied the everyday moral experiences of young people aged 11 to 16 and how these related to expressions of agency. Our results revealed that young people's agency was manifested through three interrelated dimensions: their aspirations, concerns, and capacities. Agential expression was context dependent, either bolstered or thwarted by certain people or social institutions. Our study empirically supports our ontological advancement of Childhood Ethics as a sub‐specialization of Childhood Studies, offering novel evidence on children's agency. This work further promotes the importance of meaningfully including young people in discussions, decisions, and actions that affect them.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildren & SocietySame topicChildren's Rights and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207