MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7125715715 · doi:10.17169/fqs-27.1.4440

The Use of Theater to Restore Intergenerational Relationships and Knowledge Transfer in Africa: A Narrative Review

2025· article· en· W7125715715 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphanie Caron-Roy, Bonnie Fournier, Roula Keitly-Hawa, Susan Sommerfeldt, Artem Mamadzhanov

Bibliographic record

VenueForum: Qualitative Social Research (Freie Universität Berlin) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaWestern UniversityThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeAction (physics)Citizen journalismKnowledge transferParticipatory action researchTraditional knowledgeSustainability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intergenerational knowledge transfer (IGKT) remains a significant challenge for northern Ugandan communities following 25-years of civil war, displacement, and continued strife in the region. In this narrative review, we explore what is known in relation to enhancing IGKT and the re-establishment of local traditions through the use of arts-based research methods, and specifically, applied theater. Using an integrative review search strategy and a qualitative assessment tool, we analyze relevant literature. Findings include six key areas where theater methods may be relevant in exploring IGKT in Africa. These are: Supporting childhood and human development; addressing gender inequities and generational structures; supporting conflict resolutions across generations; promoting HIV/AIDS prevention, awareness, and education; navigating ethical lessons and theater in Africa; fostering understanding and action on environmental sustainability and climate change. Researchers using participatory theater methods may offer insight into intergenerational relationships and knowledge transfer in the northern Ugandan post-conflict context, yet it is not without known ethical and material realities of such work in Africa.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.858
GPT teacher head0.686
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForum: Qualitative Social Research (Freie Universität Berlin)Same topicParticipatory Visual Research MethodsFrench-language works237,207