MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077704850 · doi:10.1080/10398560902948605

Promoting Traditions: An Evaluation of a Wilderness Activity Among First Nations of Canada

2009· article· en· W2077704850 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alain Janelle, Arlène Laliberté, Ulric Ottawa

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Psychiatry · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsHôpital Rivière-des-PrairiesUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildernessGeographyEnvironmental ethicsPolitical sciencePsychologyEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental planningEcologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Several native American communities face serious social problems brought about by the loss of culture. Many First-Nation communities organize traditional activities in a wilderness setting to promote culture and prevent social problems, among them suicide. The activities evaluated in this study were organized by the Atikamek community of Manawan (Quebec, Canada) for adolescents aged between 14 and 17 years. The main goals of these activities were to increase self-esteem, re-establish cultural continuity, encourage pro-social behaviours among the participants and ultimately empower and mobilize the community. METHODS: Within the context of an honours thesis project, this research assessed the process and the effects of these traditional activities on a group of First-Nation youth. The evaluation used a mixed methodology consisting of two self-esteem scales and participatory observation. The results of this evaluative study show that this type of traditional activity is an innovative tool to increase cultural pride, foster pro-social behaviour and empower First-Nation youth. CONCLUSIONS: Obstacles met during the course of this research project highlight the importance of developing methodologies able to capture the rich and specific outcomes of traditional activities in an Aboriginal context.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian PsychiatrySame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207