Allowing the experiences of older adults to be heard: Interpreting senior centre accessibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Senior centres aim to support and improve the health of older adults by offering a wide variety ofservices and activities tailored to their needs, yet there is little known about accessibility of senior centres. Inaccessible environments can negatively impact participation and health potentially leading to increased sedentary behaviour and morbidity. This study explores the accessibility experiences of older adults through a case study of a senior centre in Southwestern Ontario. This study utilizes a hermeneutic phenomenological approach to ascertain a deeper understanding of the participants’ lived experiences. Six older adult members (m = 2, f = 4; Mage = 72 years) at the participating senior centre volunteered to complete semi-structured interviews. Exploration of data requires each interview to be transcribed verbatim, then analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Emerging from the data were three themes: ideological perspective, aging identity, and barrier dismissal. Upon further analysis, it was revealed that all themes individually, and collectively, contributed to barrier normalization. If participants have been engaging in barrier normalization, they may fail to notice accessibility issues leading them to believe challenges experienced are minor or that few-to-no barriers exist at the senior centre. Normalizing barriers within the environment may indicate to older adults that they are responsible for overcoming challenges, as barriers are a product of their declining bodies. Thus, perpetuating victim-blaming ideologies and potentially hindering environmental approaches to accessibility that target external factors to create environments that are accepting and inclusive to a diversity of individuals.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".