‘It's overwhelming at the start’: transitioning to public transit use as an older adult
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Independent mobility is an important component of healthy ageing. Public transit may be an affordable way to achieve independent mobility, and yet little is known about older adults’ transition to public transit. This paper addresses this research gap by providing an exploration of older adults’ experiences transitioning to public transit use, and by comparing these experiences to those of older people who have always travelled using transit. Twenty-four older adults (65+) living in Hamilton, Canada, who use public transit completed semi-structured interviews during which they discussed their experiences when they first began to use transit. These experiences are framed herein with the concept self-efficacy, i.e. how one's belief in their ability to complete a task shapes their ability to complete said task. Results indicate that most older adults acquire skills to transition to public transit, such as trip planning, boarding, knowing where to sit and exiting the bus. These skills are developed through practice. As one gains experience, one becomes more confident in their ability to meet their daily travel needs using transit. Therefore, the transition to public transit as an older adult can be more challenging for those with little experience using public transit. This paper highlights the danger of assuming all older adults will effortlessly take up transit and stresses the importance of older adults gaining experience using public transit.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".