MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610101960 · doi:10.1093/migration/mnx033

Colonized subjects and their emigration experiences. The case of Iranian students and their integration strategies in Western Europe

2017· article· en· W2610101960 on OpenAlexaff
Aryan Karimi, Sandra M. Bucerius

Bibliographic record

VenueMigration Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmigrationImmigrationConformityPoliticsQualitative researchPolitical scienceColonialismGender studiesSociologySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract During the past decade, Iranian students made up a major immigration wave to European countries. A systematic study of their immigration situation, however, seems absent in the academic literature. In this paper, we are examining Iranian students’ emigration decisions and their chosen integration strategies into their new host societies (Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden) through the concepts of ‘colonial mentality’ and ‘Anglo-conformity’. Based on fieldwork and qualitative interviews with Iranian students, our findings suggest that religio-cultural performances and language skills are the main strategies that Iranian students employ to associate themselves with Westerners before and after emigration. We conclude that the processes of immigration and integration begin long before emigration actually takes place and that the specific historico-political background of Iranian students plays an important role in these processes.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMigration StudiesSame topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207