Social participation through the lens of diversity: insights from three social groups of older people in Chile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article explores the experiences of social participation among Indigenous, migrant and older people with disabilities in Chile. While substantial evidence shows the importance of social participation in ageing policy, research on how diverse groups of older people in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) perceive and engage in it is limited. The article examines the participatory practices of these populations and the challenges they face in accessing and being included in their chosen spaces of engagement. Six focus groups were held with key informants from government offices and community-based organizations, and individual in-depth interviews were conducted with older people. The collected data were then analysed using an inductive content analysis approach. Findings show that several historical and structural factors influence social participation among the three studied groups, particularly their vulnerability to precarity and discrimination in the Chilean context. The dominant perspective of key informants on social participation – as a means of staying healthy, keeping busy and finding contentment – should be contrasted with the actual social, cultural and economic circumstances. Indeed, most of the older participants in this study stated that they use social participation as a means of exercising agency, as it allows them to develop significant and supportive relationships that facilitate their daily lives and provide opportunities for individual and collective empowerment. This article contributes to the development of social gerontology in the Global South by integrating diversity into research design and enhancing understanding of the conditions under which people in Chile age and participate in society.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".