MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1768415897 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.40.5.677

Resettled Refugee Families and Their Children’s Futures: Coherence, Hope and Support

2009· article· en· W1768415897 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rebecca Atwell, Sandra M. Gifford, Brooke Wilmsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, psychology, and well-being
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeFutures contractNegotiationSociologyCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Social supportGender studiesEconomic growthPolitical sciencePsychologySocial psychologySocial scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the factors which influence the ability of resettled refugee parents to envisage their adolescents’ futures and support them in setting and achieving goals. It is based on the findings of a study of 10 refugee families from Africa, Asia, Europe and the Middle East, two to three years after they had arrived in Melbourne, Australia. Analysis of the findings draws on Antonovsky’s ‘sense of coherence’ framework to highlight the conditions which assist refugee parents to negotiate their social environment and develop realistic ambitions for their families’ futures. This framework is also used to point to ways in which refugee families might best be assisted by host communities to guide and support their children and thus overcome some of the potential intergenerational conflicts which can occur following resettlement.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations142
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicHealth, psychology, and well-beingFrench-language works237,207