‘Do young legislators face age-based discrimination in parliament? Views from young MPs across the globe'
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
There is a growing literature on youth representation in parliament illustrating a stark underrepresentation of adults aged 35 years or under, as well as 40 years or under, in most national legislatures across the globe. However, we know less about the kind of treatment young MPs receive once elected to parliament. Through a survey with structured and open-ended questions, featuring 144 young legislators across the globe, we illustrate that – judging by these perceptions – youths’ obstacles in politics do not stop at the electoral stage. A sizeable number of young MPs from our sample report that they experience ageism in many national legislatures. Most frequently, such perceived ageism is informal. In the view of young MPs, it manifests itself in subtle and not-so-subtle forms of discrimination and belittling treatment. For the broader literature on representation, this implies that the disadvantage youth face during elections might continue once in parliament, with the potential risk that this group of legislators has less influence in parliament than other groups.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it