MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975267494 · doi:10.1177/0002764211407837

Diverse Pathways to Immigrant Political Incorporation

2011· article· en· W1975267494 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sarah J. Mahler, Myer Siemiatycki

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Behavioral Scientist · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationPoliticsEthnic groupSociocultural evolutionDestinationsPolitical scienceEconomic growthVotingVoting behaviorPolitical economyDevelopment economicsSociologyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In both Canada and the United States, immigration is producing major demographic and sociocultural changes. Yet relatively little research has been devoted to the impact of immigration on each country’s political life. Even less attention has been paid to comparing the patterns of immigrant political participation in both countries. This has left underinvestigated a host of important questions about the body politic of Canada and the United States: Measured at national, urban, and community scales, do immigrants in the two countries become integrated into formal politics such as voting and running for elected office? Are they engaged in more informal political activities such as community and ethnic organizing? If so, then how do various immigrant communities mobilize politically, form agendas and alliances, express their voices, and expand their opportunities? As more countries and cities around the world become immigration destinations, there is much to be learned about creating inclusive political systems from the comparative experience of Canada and the United States illustrated in this volume.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.237 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Behavioral ScientistSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207