Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper sets out to understand how immigrants to Canada (specifically Hong Kong immigrants) deal with competing senses of their situation in deciding how or whether to adjust to their new environment. In particular, the purpose of this paper is to focus on the “in-between state” of mind where individuals try to manage competing senses of their experiences in Canada. Design/methodology/approach The authors draw on critical sensemaking (CSM) in the study of the micro-processes of identity work at play among a group of 19 Hong Kong Chinese skilled immigrants to Canada. Findings The study’s findings indicate that immigrant experiences are often filtered through the competing sensemaking of the immigrants themselves and those of the so-called “host” community. As the study of Hong Kong immigrants suggests, this can lead to confused and compromised experiences of being an immigrant in the Canadian context. Research limitations/implications The study was confined to immigrants to Canada from Hong Kong. Further study of different immigrant groups may throw light on the extent to which competing sensemaking is related to cultural differences that affect not only the distance in understanding but the management of that distance. Practical implications The paper contributes to the diversity management literature and practice through understanding immigrants’ identity construction and its oscillations, influences, and restrictions as agency in context. Social implications The paper helps diversity managers, policy makers, and social activists to understand the role of sensemaking when providing social and structural support in workplace contexts. Originality/value The study reveals the importance of sensemaking in the experiences of immigrants to Canada. In particular, it broadens knowledge of the problems of adjusting to a new (national) environment from structural constraints to micro-processes of making sense. In the process, the study of the management of competing senses of an environment contributes to the development of CSM with the focus on, what we call, the state of in-betweeness.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.027 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".