MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027956427 · doi:10.1080/13648470802355467

Meaning of 9/11 for two Pakistani communities: from external intruders to the internalisation of a negative self-image

2008· article· en· W2027956427 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cécile Rousseau, Uzma Jamil

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropology and Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMirroringContext (archaeology)TerrorismPoliticsSociologyImmigrationGender studiesPolitical scienceMedia studiesSocial psychologyLawPsychologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since September 11, the increase in international tensions and the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have created turmoil and fears in immigrant communities, fanned by the media in the context of the war against terrorism. This paper aims to compare the meaning systems evoked around 9/11 within two Pakistani groups-an immigrant community in Montreal and a group in Karachi. It also intends to examine the representation of themselves and of the 'Other' within these two groups. Results suggest that both Karachi and Montreal Pakistani respondents favour a conspiracy scenario which protects the Muslim community from the responsibility of 9/11 events. They refer to an argumentation process based on 'proofs', thus mirroring the political rhetoric used by the US government and its allies to justify the military intervention in Iraq. In the Montreal group, the pervasive feeling of fear and the bleak image that the community has of itself support the hypothesis of an immigrant internalisation of the negative representations of Muslim and South Asian identities in the North American context. The negative self-image observed in these minority groups indicates that more effort than ever should be dedicated to understanding the impact of the present international context on minority-majority relations in multi-ethnic societies. It is as if America is sitting right here in the living room with us … We have to ask them permission to breathe. (Parveen, Karachi).

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)0.003
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.027
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropology and MedicineSame topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207