Socialization for independence and interdependence in Canadian and South Asian immigrant families in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study I compared independence and interdependence in Canadian (N = 43) and South Asian immigrant mothers (N =49) and their children (Canadian: N = 44, South Asian: N = 47), living in Edmonton, which is an Anglophone city in Western Canada. Canada and South Asia have been classified as individualistic and collectivistic cultures respectively (Hofstede, 1980). I used self-report measures to assess mothers’ inter/independence orientations on several dimensions, namely family allocentrism, Asian values, self-construal, traditionalism and modernity. In addition, I assessed socialization for independence or interdependence in a story-telling task with mothers and children. I found that South Asians were more interdependent in private domains such as family relations and independent in public domains such as employment and education. Mothers in both cultures gave importance to the development of independence as well as interdependence in their children. However, in the story-telling task, South Asian mothers encouraged more interdependence than Canadian mothers. South Asian children also showed more interdependent orientations than Canadian children. This study demonstrates that a domain-specific description best explains people’s independence and interdependence. In addition, this study also emphasizes the utility of using a mixed methods approach to understand the socialization process.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".