MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313469079 · doi:10.1080/0376835x.2022.2163227

Investigating volunteer activities in South Africa

2023· article· en· W4313469079 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jaydro Fondling, Simbarashe Murozvi, Derek Yu, Nothando Mtshali

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment Southern Africa · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNonprofit Sector and Volunteering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolunteerQuarter (Canadian coin)UnemploymentUnemployment rateSocioeconomicsDemographyVolunteer workDemographic economicsGeographyWork (physics)SociologyEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is the first South African study that analysed all three available waves of Statistics South Africa’s Volunteer Activities Survey data, which was linked to the Quarterly Labour Force Survey in the third quarter of the same year (2010, 2014 and 2018). The empirical findings showed that volunteers were predominantly female Africans without Matric, aged 25–34 years and resided in the urban areas of KwaZulu-Natal, Gauteng and Limpopo. In 2018 the labour force participation rate and unemployment rate of the volunteers were 62% and 34% respectively. These rates were both a bit higher than the corresponding rates of people who did not volunteer. The volunteers spent 20 h in the past four weeks on volunteering activities relating to service work and elementary occupations. More than 85% of volunteers did not expect to receive anything back. For those who indicated otherwise, they most likely expected to receive out-of-pocket expenses and food.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.281
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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopment Southern AfricaSame topicNonprofit Sector and VolunteeringFrench-language works237,207