MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301121522 · doi:10.46692/9781847426932.005

The intersections of policy, practice and experience

2012· other· en· W4301121522 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicResearch in Social Sciences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter outlines how discourse in policy and practice can be linked with older people's experiences of transition in late life. It moves beyond academic understandings of transition, providing the conceptual background and methodological means to reinterpret transitions as they are presented in social policy discourse. Rather than treating the study of social policy and the analysis of lived experience as separate, this chapter is drawn to an understanding of what happens at the intersections of these sites. First, it outlines how policy discourse may be understood to represent and shape socio-cultural interpretations of ageing and late life. Second, it outlines how a narrative approach can be used to access the storylines told in public policy and older people's accounts, and the link between the two. Third, it outlines how these ideas were used in the Late Life Transitions project that forms the basis of the book. This linked approach provides the foundation to consider the models that shape late life, and the ways in which older people may use these ideas to negotiate socio-cultural and personal constructs of ageing. Together, a storied approach to late life can provide new ways of understanding expectations and interpretations of transitions in late life as taking place in the intersections between policies, discourses, organisational practices and lived experience. In doing so, the approach builds on and links critical traditions in gerontology from structural and humanist perspectives. It outlines both how older people's experience may be shaped through ideas such as those articulated by academic study and public policy practices, and how older people may draw on, negotiate or contest the expressed ideas about ageing and transitions in their own lives. Although focus on policy has always been central to the study of ageing from a critical perspective (Estes, 1979; Phillipson, 1982; Walker, 1982), contemporary planning issues have brought debates on ageing to the fore. In recent years, concerns for transitions related to ageing and late life have resurfaced through debates on the age of eligibility for retirement benefits, and ideas on how to best achieve productive and successful ageing (see Moody, 2001). Underlying the attention to issues of ageing are concerns for financial stability amid shifting demographics, ensuring productivity over the lifecourse, and attempts to reduce fiscal expenditure on costs such as pensions (Gee and Gutman, 2000).

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0130.083
Scholarly communication0.0230.027
Open science0.0020.018
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.438 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicResearch in Social SciencesFrench-language works237,207