Muslims in Canada: Collective Identities, Attitudes of Otherment and Canadian Muslim Perspectives on Radicalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is based on a larger Master of Arts thesis that explores the collective identity of Muslims in Canada, and how their experiences as part of a religious minority have shaped their collective identity. It also explores attitudes of otherment , out-group suspicion, and how disenfranchisement among certain individuals may result in a distortion of the Islamic religion. For the purposes of this paper the following will be explored: perceptions of the efforts of the Canadian state to integrate Muslims, the existence of Islamophobia among Canadians in general, and the potential disenfranchisement and vulnerability of Muslim youth to radicalization. The collaborative role that Muslims must take alongside agents of the Canadian state (i.e., Canadian police forces) in order to prevent radicalism is also examined. The research relies primarily on in-depth interviews with five individual Muslims of various ages and backgrounds who were born in Canada as second-generation immigrants and have become Canadian citizens. Their opinions on the role of the Muslim community in preventing radicalism in the Canadian context are explored and contextualized.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".