Ethnic enclosure, social networks, and leisure behaviour of immigrants from Korea, Mexico, and Poland
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The goal of this study was to provide an understanding of the concept of ethnic enclosure in leisure and the effect it has on the lives of immigrants after their settlement in the host country. This study explored the reasons that motivate ethnic minorities to associate predominantly with members of the same ethnic group and determined possible consequences of ethnic enclosure in leisure. Analysis presented in this study is based on semi‐structured, in‐depth interviews that were conducted in Chicago, Illinois, between April and October 2001 with 39 first‐generation immigrants from Korea, Mexico, and Poland. The overwhelming majority of interviewees confirmed that members of their own ethnic group constituted their primary leisure companions. Commonly mentioned explanations for the ethnic enclosure in leisure included comfort level, similar experiences, common culture, lack of conversation topics with mainstream Americans, lack of English language skills, discrimination/exclusion by the mainstream, and fear of the unknown. Limiting leisure contacts to members of their own ethnic group provided psychological and emotional comfort to immigrants as well as certain tangible economic benefits. On the other hand, it delayed their assimilation, led to difficulties in securing employment, and hindered advancement in the workplace.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it