Development of a Strategy to Promote Sustainable Information Literacy Among the Elderly in Xi'an City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined sustainable development strategies to enhance the information literacy of older adults in Xi’an. This paper aimed to (1) study the current situation of sustainable information literacy of older people in Xi’an; (2) provide strategies for improving sustainable information literacy of older people in Xi’an; and (3) evaluate the adaptability and feasibility of these strategies. The sample group consisted of 384 older people from five communities in Xi’an, selected using systematic and simple random sampling methods. Data were collected through questionnaires, structured interviews with ten experts, and evaluations by eight high-level administrators. The research instruments included a questionnaire to gather quantitative data on information literacy of older people, structured interviews to gather qualitative insights from experts, and evaluation forms to assess the feasibility of the proposed strategies. The findings revealed that while the overall level of sustainable information literacy of older people in Xi’an was high, there was significant variation across different aspects. Based on the SWOT-PEST matrix model, this paper systematically analyzes the external macro-environmental opportunities and threats to information literacy among older people in Xi'an from four aspects: politics, economy, society, and technology. It also examines the internal micro advantages and disadvantages and proposes countermeasures and suggestions accordingly. The study developed 42 strategies for improving information literacy, including nine for information awareness, 10 for information knowledge, 9 for information competence, and 14 for information ethics. The adaptability and feasibility of strategies for improving the sustainable development of information literacy of older people in Xi’an in four aspects were at the highest level, with the values between 4.50 and 5.00 (x.x̄=4.68 and ==4.65), which means the strategies for improving the sustainable development of information literacy of older people in Xi’an are adaptable and feasible.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".