MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466940585 · doi:10.1080/19438192.2016.1199421

Conspiracy of silence: cultural conflict as a risk factor for the development of eating disorders among second-generation Canadian South Asian women

2016· article· en· W2466940585 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nida Mustafa, Arshia U. Zaidi, Robert R. Weaver

Bibliographic record

VenueSouth Asian Diaspora · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlienationSilenceEating disordersDisconnectionPsychologyMental healthGender studiesRelation (database)Face (sociological concept)Social psychologyClinical psychologySociologyPsychiatryPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This phenomenological study examines second-generation Canadian South Asian women’s experiences of an eating disorder, and explores issues of culture conflict in relation to mental health tensions and body/self-concept distortions. Eight second-generation South Asian women who have sought help for an eating disorder participated in semi-structured interviews. Using feminist and transcultural theories, our analyses suggest that body image distortions stem from myriad pressures women face in relation to others in their lives. In constant attempt to follow familial and cultural expectations, these women felt a disconnection and alienation linking to mental pressure, which may be a factor in the development of self-dissatisfaction and ultimately eating disorders for this group. This research elevates awareness of eating disorders within the South Asian community as a way to break the ‘conspiracy of silence’ that surrounds this growing health concern.

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)0.003
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 score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSouth Asian DiasporaSame topicEating Disorders and BehaviorsFrench-language works237,207