Public Opinion on Canadian Aboriginal Issues, 1976-98: Persistence, Change, and Cohort Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT/RESUME This article sketches the broad contours of change and persistence in public opinion on selected aboriginal issues in Canada during the last part of the twentieth century, and conducts an exploratory investigation of patterns exhibited by different birth cohorts on those issues. Data are from large national surveys conducted in 1976, 1986, and 1998. Comparisons focus on awareness of events and phenomena in the realm of aboriginal affairs, 'generalized support' for aboriginal people, land claims, special status, and approval of the use of particular tactics. The birth cohorts on which the analysis focuses are: World War I Era and Earlier, Roaring Twenties, Depression, World War II, and the Early Baby Boomers. Late Boomers ('Gen-X') and the Baby Bust cohort are examined in a more cursory manner due to small sub-sample size. Cet article retrace dans les grandes lignes les changements et la perennite de l'opinion publique en ce qui concerne certaines questions autochtones au Canada la fin du vingtieme siecle. II conduit une recherche exploratoire des conceptions propres differentes cohortes au sujet de ces questions. Les donnees proviennent des grandes enquetes l'echelle nationale menees en 1976, 1986 et 1988. Les comparaisons portent sur la sensibilisation aux evenments et aux phenomenes dans le domaine des affaires autochtones, sur [much less than]l'appui generalise[much greater than] aux Autochotones, sur les revendications territoriales, sur la reconnaissance de la specificite autochtone, et sur l'approbation accordee a l'emploi de certaines tactiques. Les cohortes concernees par cette enquete sont: la generation de la Premiere Guerre mondiale et d'avant celle-ci, la generation des Annees folles de l'apres-guerre, celle de la Depression, de la Seconde Guerre mondiale et la premiere generation du baby-boom. La seconde generatio n de l'apres-guerre (generation X) ainsi que la generation qui correspond a l'effondrement de la natalite sont etudiees plus superficiellement cause des faibles effectifs du sous-groupe. INTRODUCTION The goals of this article are: (1) to sketch the broad contours of change and persistence in public opinion on selected aboriginal issues in Canada during the last part of the twentieth century; and (2) to conduct an exploratory investigation of patterns (or lack thereof) exhibited by different birth cohorts on those aboriginal issues. Explanation of changes or of differences between cohorts is not part of the mandate here. For instance, on the matter of attitudinal change during the period under study, we are only concerned with ascertaining its direction, magnitude, and cohort location, and we are not concerned with other variables (e.g., education or occupation or gender) that might be influencing any such changes. The approach taken is to compare the results of large national surveys conducted in 1976, 1986, and 1998. The comparisons focus on the following objects of analysis: awareness of events and phenomena in the realm of aboriginal affairs; 'generalized support' for aboriginal people (especially in their relations with government); land claims; special status; and aversion to the use of particular tactics. It must be emphasized that because the author had no input to the construction of the 1998 questionnaire, comparability is necessarily compromised. While those limitations on comparability are identified where they arise, the reader will have to make his/her own judgements on the validity of the comparisons. The author's own conclusions drawn from those comparisons will be cautiously phrased. This study is unusual in at least two respects. First, it examines attitudinal and opinion change over a relatively long time period -- namely, twenty-two years (1976 to 1998). Secondly, it considers public opinion in terms of the views held by five separate birth cohorts examined at two or three points in time over the twenty-two years. …
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".