MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2235943144 · doi:10.71781/12745

La lutte pour la reconnaissance des Québécoises de 2e génération portant le voile

2015· dissertation· fr· W2235943144 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Khaoula Zoghlami

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2015
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce mémoire vise à comprendre l’expérience de vie des jeunes Québécoises de 2e génération portant le voile islamique, qui ont vécu le débat sur la charte de la laïcité au Québec en 2012. Un des articles de ce projet de loi visait à interdire le port des signes religieux «ostentatoires» par les employés de la fonction publique. Une vague de protestation a animé les membres des minorités religieuses visées et une apparition, quoique marginale, des Québécois de 2e génération a commencé à émerger. À travers le concept de lutte pour la reconnaissance tel que théorisé par Honneth et celui de stigmate amené par Goffman et élaboré par Göle, j’ai tenté de comprendre l’expérience de lutte pour la reconnaissance entamée par des Québécoises porteuses d’un signe religieux stigmatisé. Le concept d’hybridité m’a permis également de comprendre la richesse identitaire de ces jeunes qui se manifeste notamment dans l’articulation de leurs revendications. J’ai ainsi mené 13 entrevues semi dirigées sur le mode du récit de vie avec des jeunes femmes âgées entre 19 et 27 ans, nées au Québec et portant le voile islamique.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicFrench Urban and Social Studies→French-language works237,207→