Methodological problems related to alcohol research among Turks and Moroccans living in the Netherlands: findings from semi‐structured interviews
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To identify factors related to alcohol use among Turks and Moroccans living in the Netherlands. Furthermore, to reveal methodological problems related to research among Turks and Moroccans in general and to alcohol research among these groups in particular. DESIGN: Individual face-to-face interviews were carried out with Dutch researchers (n = 9), Turkish and Moroccan (health) practitioners working in the field with Turks (n = 4) or Moroccans (n = 2), and members of the target population with a Turkish (n = 3) or a Moroccan background (n = 2). Furthermore, focus-group interviews were held with Turkish women (n = 4), Turkish men (n = 3), Moroccan women (n = 4) and Moroccan men (n = 3) working as health professionals. RESULTS: Alcohol use seems prevalent particularly among second-generation Turks and Moroccans and is related to: upbringing, influence of peer groups, integration and the degree in which Islamic rules are practised. Written questionnaires seem more appropriate for second-generation Turks and Moroccans, because they have fewer language problems and are more familiar with Western bureaucratic society. However, both generations may prefer face-to-face interviews since both groups fear that 'written' answers about the sensitive subject 'alcohol use' may somehow become known among community members. Similarly, an interviewer with a Dutch background may elicit more reliable answers about alcohol use than an interviewer with a Turkish or Moroccan background. CONCLUSION: In alcohol research special attention should be paid to second-generation Turks and Moroccans. Although it is probably easier to conduct alcohol studies in this group than in first-generation Turks and Moroccans, quantitative research is needed to test the hypothesis that written questionnaires elicit more reliable answers about alcohol use than face-to-face interviews. Furthermore, the influence of ethnic matching on response and data quality should be tested further.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".