From the Tool to the Virtuality: Motivation and Styles of Internet Users: The Example of Seniors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to understand the individual and Internet relationships through a qualitative study conducted by online questionnaires carried out on 131 Canadian and Swiss seniors. We suggest a model which distinguishes three realities that the Internet encompasses for individuals. The first reality is that of the Internet as a tool of communication. The second reality is that of the Internet as a device of interaction, and finally, the third reality is that of the Internet as a virtual world. Four declared types of behaviors, or Internet users’ styles, would be proposed in a second analysis. The study shows that any access to one of these options or to another seems to depend on factors that are specific to individuals, distinct from the more or less intensive use of this technology. [ Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: < getinfo@haworthpressinc.com > Website: < https://www.HaworthPress.com > © 2001 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved .]
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".