MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2305664344 · doi:10.14288/1.0054023

The impact of cross-cultural reentry on shaping life histories

2009· article· en· W2305664344 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kenneth M.J. Crystal

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReentryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hermeneutic-phenomenological, mutli-case study was conducted to discern how the experience of cross-cultural reentry impacts the life histories of three repatriated, English speaking, Canadian males. In this study, identity is defined as a self-narrative. During an audiotaped, in-depth interview, the co-researchers described motivations for leaving Canada, their experiences of life overseas, cross-cultural reentry to Canada, as well as, expectations concerning their futures. A comparative analysis was conducted to illustrate common themes and narrative structure among the three accounts. The overall cross-cultural experience was seen to be structured as an adventure: the quest for personhood. The drive towards personhood is described as the search for harmony among the various stances or roles that provide life with a sense of fulfillment and meaning. The cross-cultural quest for personhood has four phases. The first two phases of the quest correspond to leave taking and of consecrating an overseas home. These phases are defined by their outward adventure of action taking. Themes associated with phase one are separation, attachment, commitment and unfinished business. Themes associated with phase two are building a framework of life supports and settling down. The next phase of the story corresponds to disruption of the co-researchers' lives and an inward adventure of sustained self-confrontations. Themes highlighted during this period of cross-cultural reentry are developmental, cultural, and temporal assaults upon self-identity. The final phase of the story corresponds to responsibility-taking and the re-appropriation of a life path towards fulfillment. Implication for models of cross-cultural adjustment, as well as, implications for counseling practice, are discussed.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0230.017
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicAging and Gerontology Research→French-language works237,207→