MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626375097 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.44.1.117

Disembedding the Traditional Family: Grounded Theory and the Study of Family Change among Mangor and Gaverk Tribes of Iranian Kurdistan

2013· article· en· W2626375097 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ahmad Mohammadpur

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrounded theorySociologyModernization theoryMeaning (existential)EnculturationPsychologySocial scienceQualitative researchAnthropologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this article is to explore the meaning of family changes among Mangor and Gaverk tribes of Mahabad Township in Iranian Kurdistan. The interpretive paradigm provided the conceptual framework used to explain various aspects of the inquiry. Data were collected and analyzed using “(irounded Theory” methodology. Seven main categories and supporting factors were identified during analysis. These include: the traditional family, modernization, enculturation, detraditionalization, empowerment, and the modernized family. The core category constructed during selective coding was conceptualized as a process of “Discmbcdding the Traditional Family.” This category captures the nature of family changes and pulls together all of the other main categories. According to this category, the people of the region interpret family changes in their community as relative the traditional family structure has been replaced with new a family structure and functions. The results arc represented in a conceptual model consisting of conditions, interactions, and consequences arranged around the core category.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.017
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicIslamic Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207