MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2957009497 · doi:10.71781/18444

Le traumatisme du Génocide arménien de 1915 et l'acculturation des Arméniens à Montréal

2018· dissertation· fr· W2957009497 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Françoise Garabed

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2018
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East Politics and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcculturationGeographyImmigrationArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le génocide affecte profondément le bien-être du groupe qui en a été la victime, au point où les survivants transmettent le traumatisme vécu à leurs descendants. Cette étude examine l’impact du Génocide arménien de 1915 sur le bien-être psychologique des Arméniens de Montréal et sur leur acculturation à la société canadienne. Cent Arméniens âgés entre 18 à 70 ans ont répondu à diverses échelles portant sur ces variables – notamment l'Impact du Génocide Arménien, une version modifiée du Perceived Impact of the Genocide Scale (Der-Karabetian et Balian, 1997) – et ont aussi passé une tâche émotionnelle de Stroop (McNally et al., 1993). Les résultats montrent que les Arméniens manifestant un style d’acculturation « intégré » et « ethnocentriste » se sentent plus impactés par le Génocide arménien que les Arméniens au style « assimilé » (p < .01). Aucune corrélation significative n’a été détectée entre l’impact du Génocide arménien et les variables liés au bien-être psychologique. Les différences observées au niveau de l’âge et du sexe sont également abordées, en plus des implications méthodologiques de certains tests pour la recherche future.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicMiddle East Politics and SocietyFrench-language works237,207