Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article innovatively combines the analysis of both cultural and outdoor activities in Canada, activities that have been mostly studied separately until now. This study thus feeds into the debate between the distinction framework (focusing on the highbrow/lowbrow opposition) and the omnivorism thesis (distinguishing between omnivorous and univorous groups) in cultural sociology. From Latent Class Analysis (LCA), this study identifies five clusters, which differentiate people practicing either or both cultural and outdoor activities. The clusters are labelled as follow: "tele-univore," "digital indoor," "conventional indoor," "outdoor univore," and "omnivore." Binary logistic regressions reveal that education, age and rural/urban identity are the key factors in identifying who practices which activities. The findings are threefold. First, while confirming the omnivore theory, our results show that cultural capital matters more than economic capital in explaining who participates in which activities. Second, rural people tend to be slightly more engaged than urban people in consumptive and motorized outdoor activities and less in all cultural activities. Third, the shift to digitization and the increase in outdoor activities appears to have exacerbated the divide between older and younger generations.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".