MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774261037 · doi:10.1080/15313204.2017.1409679

Exploring ethnic identity and its development process among young adult Filipino Americans

2017· article· en· W2774261037 on OpenAlexaff
Noemi Teppang, Meekyung Han, YongJae Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupIdentity (music)PsychologyGender studiesSociologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is intended to improve understanding of the development of ethnic identity among young adult Filipino Americans aged 18–24, a stage typically marked by independence and autonomy. There is a great need to expand research on the young adult Filipino population, which is part of the second largest Asian immigrant population in the United States. The purpose of this qualitative study with individual interviews is to explore the process of ethnic identity development in this group. The study sample recruited through convenience and snowball sampling methods consisted of 13 young adult Filipino Americans living in the San Francisco Bay area. The key findings emphasize that the participants’ ethnic identity formed through a continuous, nonlinear process influenced by various environmental factors, such as family, peers, and social groups. Through family values and dynamics, the participants have learned the values of respect and collectivity, which positively influenced the process of ethnic identity development. Through involvement in peer and social groups, the participants developed pride and a sense of community, which affirmed their ethnic identity. The study findings contribute to and expand research on the ethnic identity of young adult Filipino Americans.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.469
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.388
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.057 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social WorkSame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207