MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2935933151 · doi:10.4000/communiquer.3683

Réception télévisuelle et resocialisation des immigrants d’origine tunisienne à la société québécoise

2018· article· fr· W2935933151 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Seima Souissi

Bibliographic record

VenueCommuniquer Revue de communication sociale et publique · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, Gender
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationHumanitiesPolitical scienceArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article est tiré d’une recherche doctorale sur la contribution de la télévision à la resocialisation des immigrants d’origine tunisienne nouvellement établis au Québec. Les résultats de cette recherche, qui aborde la communication interculturelle en contexte migratoire à partir de la construction du sens des contenus télévisuels, révèlent que l’écoute télévisuelle expose l’immigrant à un univers complètement nouveau et peu compréhensible. Par conséquent, la télévision n’est que rarement mobilisée, au début du séjour, comme un moyen de resocialisation à proprement parler. Son usage et ses effets se confondent aux expériences sociales des immigrants qui n’ont pas été exposés aux produits télévisuels québécois avant d’arriver au Québec. Les immigrants d’origine tunisienne, davantage exposés aux produits télévisuels français, américains ou arabes, qui sont accessibles en Tunisie, appréhendent les contenus québécois à la lumière de leur culture télévisuelle multiple. Ils relèvent alors que la télévision québécoise se démarque notamment par son « québécocentrisme », tout en étant fortement influencée par les standards américains.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.605

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommuniquer Revue de communication sociale et publiqueSame topicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, GenderFrench-language works237,207