MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388076372 · doi:10.1177/0739456x231204862

Operationalizing the Capabilities Approach to Understand Neighborhood Well-Being in a Participatory Action Research Study

2023· article· en· W4388076372 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Binet, Noémie Sportiche, Vedette Gavin, Mariana Arcaya

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Planning Education and Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental Justice and Health Disparities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersRobert Wood Johnson Foundation
KeywordsOperationalizationCitizen journalismEquity (law)Participatory action researchPsychological interventionAction (physics)SociologySet (abstract data type)Social justiceCapability approachPublic relationsProcess managementManagement scienceKnowledge managementPolitical sciencePsychologyComputer scienceBusinessEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The capabilities approach is useful for evaluating progress toward the just city. We report how a Participatory Action Research consortium studying neighborhood change and well-being designed a survey instrument measuring respondents’ ability to fulfill a set of common life priorities. We present data on priority endorsement and fulfillment, and conduct a factor analysis to explore the underlying structure of the instrument. We argue that the instrument operationalizes the capabilities approach and serves as a model for using participatory methods to evaluate the impact of planning interventions on social justice and health equity.

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)0.067
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0670.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.009
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.421
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.141 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Planning Education and ResearchSame topicEnvironmental Justice and Health DisparitiesFrench-language works237,207