MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413256664 · doi:10.1080/15350770.2025.2533558

Intergenerational Changes During the Pandemic: Societal Transformation and Temporal Indeterminacy

2025· article· en· W4413256664 on OpenAlexaff
Dany Boulanger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intergenerational Relationships · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndeterminacy (philosophy)TemporalityAmbivalenceTimelinePandemicIdentity (music)SociologyPositive economicsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Social psychologyEpistemologyPsychologyEconomicsAestheticsHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this theoretical essay, I try to present underlying and partially implicit indications that intergenerational relationships are reconfiguring during the pandemic. I start by presenting some indications in favor of a change of era, at least some deep changes that are occurring during the pandemic amidst temporal continuity and discontinuity. I follow by looking at the experience of indeterminacy as indicating a state of social transition. I particularly delve into indeterminacy and ambivalence as experienced in relation to identity and temporality. For the latter, I elaborate on the idea that people experience both acceleration and deceleration. Mainly following Mannheim (1982, 1990) all of those indications lead me to argue that intergenerational changes are happening and that they take the form of intergenerational ambivalences. I explain it by suggesting that people are “stuck” between the form and the content of their generational experience as well as between the past and the future.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intergenerational RelationshipsSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207