MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918149690 · doi:10.1177/0022022119830522

The Role of Early Immersive Culture Mixing in Cultural Identifications of Multiculturals

2019· article· en· W2918149690 on OpenAlexaff
Lee Martin, Bo Shao, David C. Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismHarmony (color)PhenomenonCultural identityIdentification (biology)Identity (music)SociologyChinese cultureSocial psychologyPsychologyAestheticsEpistemologyGeographyBiologyChinaEcologyArtVisual artsFeelingPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Becoming multicultural through early immersive culture mixing (EICM)—i.e., growing up with a mix of cultures that coexist and interact to form an emergent hybrid culture within one’s home—is a rapidly rising phenomenon in many parts of the world. This phenomenon calls for new research that recognizes the possibility of identification with a hybrid culture as well as the distinct cultures from which the hybrid culture derives. This article extends previous research into psychological variation among multiculturals based on the process of EICM, by investigating how EICM influences hybrid cultural identification and distinct cultural identification. In addition, we examine how EICM relates to the components of identity integration—blendedness and harmony. Across two studies of Chinese-Australian multiculturals, we found that whereas EICM was positively associated with multicultural participants’ identification with a hybrid culture and Australian culture, it was not related to their identification with Chinese culture. Findings also indicated that EICM positively predicted identity blendedness, but EICM did not show a clear link with identity harmony. We discuss the implications of our research for advancing EICM theory and helping to forge new research directions in cultural identification.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.400 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cross-Cultural PsychologySame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207