MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213141408 · doi:10.1080/03601277.2022.2039848

VRCHIVE: experiences conducting an online workshop teaching intergenerational participants to create virtual reality films about their lives during the COVID pandemic

2022· article· en· W4213141408 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lora Appel, Samantha Lewis-Fung, Erika Kisonas, Jennifer Recknagel

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Gerontology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity Health Network
FundersCentre for Aging + Brain Health Innovation
KeywordsFacilitatorFeelingGrandparentPsychologyMedical educationWebcastPhonePandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineMultimediaSocial psychologyComputer scienceDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The VRCHIVE workshop was a first-of-its-kind exploratory pilot initiative to examine the feasibility of running a remote, intergenerational Virtual Reality (VR) storytelling workshop through the Toronto Public Library. The workshop took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has highlighted a need to develop solutions to address the digital divide and consequent increased social isolation in older adults. The overall program goals were threefold: (1) to create a ‘VRCHIVE’ of 360° VR films that documented participants’ lives during the COVID-19 pandemic, (2) to explore the challenges and successes of the program in order to evaluate its effectiveness, and (3) to understand, broadly, the program’s impact on technology literacy, feelings of isolation, and familial relationship strengthening. Five pairs of grandparents and grandchildren (n = 10) engaged in four, one-hour long online sessions each week in November 2020. Feedback was collected through facilitator observations and weekly debriefing sessions (n = 4), as well as online participant surveys (n = 3) and phone interviews (n = 2) conducted upon program completion. All intergenerational pairs successfully completed a VR film. Post-workshop, participants reported feeling less isolated, more connected with other people, and more confident in learning to use innovative technology. A detailed description of the workshop is provided, along with a discussion on recommendations for future iterations of the program that may serve as a model for other locations that wish to implement similar programming. Overall, participants reported positive experiences, and there is an appetite to sustain and scale the program in the future.

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)0.007
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational GerontologySame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207