THE PARADOX OF BEING YOUNG AND HOMELESS: RESILIENCY IN THE FACE OF CONSTRAINTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The major contribution of this article is to address the lack of knowledge regarding homeless youth’s experiences of risk, from their point of view. The youth at-risk field has become a burgeoning area of research that tends to magnify vulnerabilities, yet limits our understanding of complex youth experiences. It is important to highlight another dimension of the homeless youth experience that has rarely been promoted, and that is one of adaptability and creativity encompassed within a framework of survivability and resilience - notions that often necessitate taking risks. Drawing on a longitudinal ethnographic study with 18 homeless youth (aged 16 and 17 years old) in Ottawa (Canada), this article paints a more complex understanding of the struggles youth face, in terms of structural (social assistance, housing) and symbolic (stigma, social representations, and identity constructs) constraints. This analysis adds complexity to youth-at-risk discourses and displays the challenges they encounter and the resilient ways in which they seek to overcome obstacles. This paper supports a movement towards recognizing youth strengths and the heterogeneity of their experiences.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".