MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307547616 · doi:10.35844/001c.38764

Online Intergenerational Participatory Research: Ingredients for Meaningful Relationships and Participation

2022· article· en· W4307547616 on OpenAlexaff
Laura M. Lee, Laura H. V. Wright, Carolina Machado, Ojaswi Niyogi, Prathit Singh, Sophie Shields, Kristen Hope

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Participatory Research Methods · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsInternational Institute for Child Rights and Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipParticipatory action researchConvention on the Rights of the ChildPublic relationsHarmNegotiationCitizen journalismPolitical scienceSociologyWork (physics)Human rightsSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over thirty years ago, children’s participation rights were recognized internationally with the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). Increased involvement of children and young people in lead, collaborative, and advisory roles in interdisciplinary research has challenged ‘traditional’ adult research practices in numerous ways. Co-production recognizes participants as experts and creators of knowledge, engages children and young people in decision-making, and addresses traditional adult-child hierarchies. #CovidUnder19 is a movement that aims to foster intergenerational partnerships between children, young people and adult members of the child rights community to develop evidence-based advocacy to uphold children’s rights throughout the pandemic, as well as in response and recovery. The COVID 4P Log smartphone app was designed to better understand ways practitioners and policymakers protect, provide, enable participation, and prevent harm in their practice. Children and young people aged 14 to 19 from countries around the world are involved as co-researchers and advisors in research design, data analysis, and knowledge exchange. This paper explores the experiences of #CovidUnder19 young people as researchers focusing on the data analysis and knowledge exchange phase and includes their reflections on meaningful intergenerational partnership in research. This includes the importance of relationships, embracing the ‘inner child’, and fostering meaningful participation in the research process. The paper concludes with recommendations for other researchers on how to work in partnership with children and young people meaningfully to strengthen the process and impact for researchers and children’s human rights.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.095
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0950.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.858
GPT teacher head0.665
Teacher spread0.193 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Participatory Research MethodsSame topicChildren's Rights and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207