Bibliographic record
Abstract
A qualitative study using ethnographic methods was conducted within the Portuguese Canadian community to describe how individuals engage in helping relationships related to personal or emotional problems. Using Spradley’s (1979) Developmental Research Sequence (DRS), participant observation, informal group interviews, and formal individual interviews were conducted with Portuguese community members and helpers. Ten informants of Portuguese descent were interviewed. Research codes and domain structures were subjected to participant checks, peer review, and expert review in order to establish the credibility and trustworthiness of this study. Ten domains were described as follows: Reliance on Family; Focus on Physical Ailments; Using Substances and Gambling to Cope with Problems; Accessing the Portuguese Community to Prevent or Cope with Problems; Receiving Help from the Church; Using Forms of Traditional Healing; Accessing Help through Family Physicians; Help Outside the Community; Reasons for Seeking Professional Help; and Barriers to Seeking Help. Cultural themes that arose from the domains were Cultural Rules for Disclosure in Different Contexts, Role Clarity, and Fatalism. This study contributes to counselling psychology research in the following ways: 1) by providing a thick description of helping relationships in the Portuguese community, a topic that has not previously been present in the counselling psychology literature; 2) by presenting barriers to counselling and reasons for seeking counselling that are specific to this population; and 3) by describing aspects of the therapeutic relationship which are culturally relevant to this group. These descriptions provide an easily accessible resource enabling mental health care providers to interact with Portuguese immigrants in a culturally safer and ii more competent manner. This study with a difficult-to-reach population serves as an example of learning to improve or modify mental health services to meet specific cultural contexts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".