MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Ongoing Psychological Colonization of North American Indigenous People: Using Social Psychological Theories to Promote Social Justice

2016· book· en· W2565883273 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie A. Fryberg, Rebecca Covarrubias, Jacob A. Burack

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2016
Typebook
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousColonizationPromotion (chess)Economic JusticeEnvironmental ethicsSociologyIndigenous cultureCriminologySocial psychologyPolitical sciencePsychologyGeographyEcologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Colonizing events of the past and present continue to disrupt and change the cultural practices, histories, families, and languages of North American Indigenous peoples. As a result, Indigenous people experience a cultural disconnect between the past and the future, what we refer to as a disruption of traditional cultural cycles, in ways that foster psychological risks. In this chapter, we first discuss how the ongoing colonization of Indigenous people in contemporary society, with specific examples from the media and education, undermines psychological well-being. Second, we offer a theory of culture change as a “promotion” approach to target and mend the cultural disruptions brought on by colonizing practices and thereby to improve well-being. Finally, we offer research-based action items for social psychologists and for society more generally to alleviate the ongoing colonization of Indigenous people.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.016
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207