MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396863821 · doi:10.1007/s13753-024-00558-6

“If Somebody Needed Help, I Went Over”: Social Capital and Therapeutic Communities of Older Adult Farmers in British Columbia Floods

2024· article· en· W4396863821 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kyle Breen, Siyu Ru, Luna Vandeweghe, Jenna Chiu, Lindsay Heyland, Haorui Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Disaster Risk Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial capitalAgency (philosophy)Flood mythPopulationDisaster recoveryPublic relationsBusinessEconomic growthPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceGeographySocial scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Older adults in disaster contexts are often thought of as a passive, vulnerable population that lacks agency and capacities to cope in the aftermath. However, it can be argued that older adults may have underrecognized strengths that can be utilized pre-, peri-, and post-disaster. One of these strengths is older adults’ unique social capital that stems from long-standing connections with other members of their respective communities. Using data from in-depth, semistructured interviews with farmers in British Columbia 3–11 months after the 2021 floods, this research explored the experiences of older adult farmers’ recovery. The farmers discussed how they leveraged their social capital to aid in their recovery efforts from the flood event. By using their bonding social capital, older adult farmers transformed their existing, deep-rooted connections into post-disaster assistance. This, in turn, generated the idea of the therapeutic community, helping community members cope in the aftermath. This research indicated the need to further examine how older adults in disaster settings can be viewed as assets with community knowledge and skills as opposed to solely as a vulnerable population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Disaster Risk ScienceSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207