MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041524143 · doi:10.1093/jrs/feu039

Multilayered Ethics in Research Involving Unaccompanied Refugee Minors

2015· article· en· W2041524143 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Refugee Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersBijzonder Onderzoeksfonds UGentEuropean Refugee FundUniversiteit Gent
KeywordsRefugeeObligationResearch ethicsEthical issuesSociologyPoliticsQualitative researchPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsLawSocial scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research articles about unaccompanied refugee minors (UM) have rarely addressed ethical issues. This is remarkable, given UM’s specific, marginalized and vulnerable position within society, and the growing interest and developments in research ethics in refugee research. This article poses the question whether studies involving UM raise specific ethical issues compared to research on other refugee groups. We formulate personal reflections on ethical issues in a particular research project—a longitudinal study of UM in Belgium—and connect them to the existing body of literature on research ethics in qualitative and refugee research. We conclude that research ethics in studies with UM need to be multilayered because of researchers’ obligation to take ethical responsibility at both the micro and socio-political levels.

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.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.540
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.025 · 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