The Experience of Community in Canadian Military Families: A Female Partners' Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a condensed version of my thesis successfully defended Spring, 2004.The question of how Canadian military families experience community arose from my employment with the Halifax Military Family Resource Centre and my position in deployment services. The literature review covered the topics of Community, Military Families and Social Support. The emerging questions dealt with matters of meaning and perception of community for the female military partners. This led to a study using qualitative research. The paradigm guiding this thesis is Critical Theory. The ensuing deconstruction of military culture revealed pervasive ideologies impacting on the everyday lives of the military family. Ethnomethodology was used to focus on how members accomplish, manage and reproduce a sense of social structure. It is a subjective and interpretive study. The stories of 7 female military partners produce emerging data leading to categorized themes from which implications, conclusions and recommendations have been drawn. EMERGENT DATA Community The seven women have been “married to the military ” anywhere from 10-25 years and all have children. I asked each what their definition of community was and to describe the community where they were raised. It appears that, within the definition, there are 3 notions of community.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".