The process of identity formation for youth growing up in multicultural familial contexts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research examines the process of identity formation for young people who grew up in multicultural contexts. While identity development has been studied by many researchers, there is little research examining how young people who are simultaneously growing up in multiple cultures experience the process of identity formation. In the present research, ten young people (20-24 years old) who have parents from two different cultures that are different than the Euro-Canadian culture, and at least one parent is considered part of visible minority, were interviewed. Two of the participants took part in a focus group to enrich and validate the findings. The overarching category that emerged was processing being different. The first aspect of processing being different was exploring one’s belonging and one’s personal choices. The other aspect was managing relationships with family members and friends; and managing conflicts that arise in these relationships. While exploring different possibilities in how to belong to different cultural contexts and what choices to make, young people find themselves always trying to balance relationships and conflicts with significant people in their lives. The process of identity formation for multicultural youth is complex and dynamic. It requires them to exercise agency in exploring and making decisions. An appropriate support system that allows young people to express themselves and feel heard may facilitate the process of navigating between different cultural contexts and building resilience.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".