Bibliographic record
Abstract
The structural family therapy approach was developed in a Western cultural context. However, its basic theoretical constructs such as structure, hierarchy and boundary resonate with Chinese family organizational structures and values. Chinese immigrant families in Canada are challenged by the vast cultural differences between their home and host country. Migration and resulting acculturation processes require families to reorganize into more complex family structures to accommodate these external and internal changes. This practicum was an attempt to apply the Structural Approach of family therapy to the Chinese immigrant families in Canada. The clinical experience demonstrated that the Structural Approach provided a good framework for assessment and intervention when working with the Chinese immigrant families. An important role of the worker was to act as a cultural intermediary to bridge the gap between family members which resulted from their differential rates of acculturation. The worker had to be aware of professional and personal value biases and not to impose them on the families when helping them search for a new balance. Adopting a flexible sub-family system approach and being sensitive to cultural values such as shame, harmony, unquestionable authority of parents and indirectness in communication helped to increase the effectiveness of intervention. Respect, empathy, focus on strengths and a positive therapeutic relationship were reinforced as important factors mediating the success of the intervention.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".