A qualitative inquiry into the experience of Chinese immigrant children in Canada: adult reflections on childhood experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Appendix A: Recruitment Notice throughout their acculturation process, and (b) an increased tolerance for or belief in cultural diversity (Berry, 1990; Berry & Kim).Immigrants have been defined as "those who move from one cultural/national situation to another, who do so voluntarily, and with the intention of it being permanent" (Berry & Kim, 1988, P. 218, 220).In looking at this transition from the perspective of it being a permanent change, migration may be viewed as a process of desocialization, while adaptation may be the outcome of resocialization (Hertz, 1981).It may therefore be helpful to conceptualize the process of adaptation from a developmental approach (Hertz; Yoshikawa, 1988).After the initial contact has been made between immigrants and the host culture, a process of acculturation commences.One element experienced in the early stages of this process is culture shock.The concept of culture has been defined to include a shared system of beliefs, values, ideologies, and social institutions that are passed down from generation to generation within a group of individuals (Collier & Thomas, 1988;Landau, 1982).The phenomenon of culture shock occurs as a result of an individual's immersion in a cultural system different from his or her own, in which he or she experiences the shock of isolation and a loss of the familiar (Adler, 1987).In essence, individuals experiencing culture shock go from living in a familiar and predictable environment to living in strange and unknown surroundings in the host country that they experience as unpredictable (Garza-Guerrero, 1974).Two crucial points about culture shock have been made.First, it is possible for individuals to be comfortable in their new surroundings in the host culture as long as they can see some commonalities with their heritage culture.However, the second point is that once the initial newness and enthusiasm fade, the
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".