MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134116365 · doi:10.1606/1044-3894.26

Askanim: Informal Helpers and Cultural Brokers as a Bridge to Secular Helpers for the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Communities of Israel and Canada

2002· article· en· W2134116365 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ernie Lightman, Ron Shor

Bibliographic record

VenueFamilies in Society The Journal of Contemporary Social Services · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCredibilityLegitimacyJudaismPublic relationsScarcityBridge (graph theory)Work (physics)SociologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthBusinessGeographyMedicineLawEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within closed communities there can be scarcity of resources to deal with severe individual or family difficulties when they arise. In addition, the communities' closed boundaries may create barriers that prevent social services in the broader society from providing needed help. A model that attempts to overcome such barriers was examined in a qualitative study of 21 informal helpers known as askanim in ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities in Canada and Israel. The findings highlight that askanim can play a key role in attempting to resolve problems internally within the community; should this fail, they can then serve as a bridge to the social services in the broader society. In both countries, professionals may approach them if they lack credibility, legitimacy, or information needed to assist families and children within a closed community. This model of collaboration that recognizes the limitations of professionals and the complementary role that resources from the community may have can potentially be applied to work with families and children in other closed communities as well.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

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

Citations45
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFamilies in Society The Journal of Contemporary Social ServicesSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207