Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation considers the political behaviour of youth in Whitefish River First Nation. This small Ojibway community located near Sudbury, Ontario is used as a case study to inquire into the political experiences, attitudes and behaviour of youth. Rooted in Community-Based Research and Indigenous Research Principles, conversations were carried out in a circle-method referred to as Discussion Circles to assess the political behaviour of youth between the ages of 16 and 25. While this study is heavily qualitative-focused, it includes some quantitative components. These include a youth political participation questionnaire and electoral participation data for Whitefish River First nation in federal, provincial and band elections. Results demonstrate that the youth have a unique experience of politics defined by their identities, community and relationships. Their political behaviour is complex and nuanced. While they may not participate in conventional political activities, they are heavily involved in activities that are rooted in their culture and traditions. The community overall is democratically healthy and tends to participate widely in federal and provincial elections. Youth are for the most part satisfied with their lives in the community, but there are significant challenges due to the consequences of colonialism. Many of these implications affect their political behaviour.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".