MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331437285 · doi:10.5509/2013861031

Becoming a Migrant: Vietnamese Emigration to East Asia

2013· article· en· W2331437285 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Danièle Bélanger, Hong‐zen Wang

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Affairs · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmigrationVietnamesePolitical scienceEast AsiaGeographyDevelopment economicsChinaEconomicsLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the early 1990s several million men and women from Southeast Asia's lower socioeconomic classes have migrated to East Asia with a temporary worker visa or a spousal visa. This article is based on five years of ongoing fieldwork in migrants' communities of origin in rural Vietnam and in places of destination in Taiwan, South Korea and Japan. The authors make three contributions: first, they argue that the categorization of migrants as either “workers” or “wives” in research obscures the complex trajectories and motives involved in the process of “becoming a migrant.” Second, they challenge studies that unquestioningly invoke social network approaches to migration. Instead, social networks should be regarded as a double-edged sword for emigrants because personal networks are embedded in a powerful migration industry. Third, they contend that migration outcomes and levels of success are, in part, influenced by processes taking place before departure. This article sheds light on the tension between migrants' agency and the structural constraints faced by candidates seeking to migrate from Vietnam, and from Southeast Asia more broadly.

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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.264
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

Citations26
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacific AffairsSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207