Enriching Social Sharing for the Dementia Community: Insights from In-Person and Online Social Programs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dementia community faces major challenges in social engagements, which have been further complicated by the prolonged physical distancing measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Designing digital tools for in-person social sharing in family and care facility settings has been well explored, but comparatively little HCI work has focused on the design of community-based social technologies for virtual settings. We present our virtual fieldwork on remote social activities explored by one dementia community in response to the impacts of the pandemic. Building upon our previously published on-site fieldwork in this community, we expand on our initial publication by follow-up interviewing caregivers and facilitators and reflecting on a virtual social program. Through thematic analysis and contrasting in-person and online formats of the program, we deepened the understanding of virtual social engagements of the dementia community, examining their efforts to leverage physical objects and environments, enhance open and flexible experiences, and expand collaborative space. We propose to open new design opportunities through holistic approaches, including reimagining community social spaces, rethinking agency in people with dementia and caregivers, and diversifying HCI support across communities and stakeholders.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it