MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974800571 · doi:10.1177/1368430206062082

Identity and Adaptation Among Minority Indo-Guyanese: Influence of Generational Status, Gender, Reference Group and Situation

2006· article· en· W1974800571 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Richard Clément, Sonia S. Singh, Sophie Gaudet

Bibliographic record

VenueGroup Processes & Intergroup Relations · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEthnic groupPsychologyAcculturationSituational ethicsSocial psychologySocial identity theoryAdaptation (eye)Ingroups and outgroupsGroup (periodic table)Minority groupContext (archaeology)Gender studiesSocial groupSociologyAnthropologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of ethnic reference group, situational characteristics, generational status, and gender on ethnic identification in relation to adaptation was studied in Indo-Guyanese immigrants living in Ottawa, Canada. Ninety-eight first-( n= 48) and second-generation ( n= 50) participants completed a questionnaire in reference to their East-Indian ancestral group, their ingroup and the national Canadian group. Results show that identification was the product of a complex interaction among reference group, situation, generation and gender. The pattern of adaptation to each reference group was influenced by generational status, and greater identification with the Canadian group relative to the Guyanese group was related to positive relations with the Canadian group. The results are discussed within the context of current theories of acculturation and intergroup relations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGroup Processes & Intergroup RelationsSame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207