MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980141489 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.32.4.461

Immigrant and Ethnic Minority families: An Introduction

2001· article· en· W2980141489 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bernhard Nauck, Barbara H. Settles

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupImmigrationTurkishGermanSociologySocial capitalDemographic economicsCultural transmission in animalsCultural capitalCultural assimilationAcculturationGender studiesSocial psychologyPsychologyGeographyEconomicsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of intergenerational transmission processes on the intercultural contact and ethnic identification of second generation adolescents is studied in five different groups of migrant families: Italian, Greek, and Turkish work migrants, German repatriates from Russia, and Jewish immigrants from Russia to Israel. In each group, 400 dyads of parents and adolescents with the same sex were interviewed with a standardized questionnaire in the language of origin or of the receiving society. Four possible outcomes of intercultural contact are distinguished: integration, assimilation, segregation, and marginalization. An explanatory model is proposed that relates these possible outcomes systematically to the availability of social and cultural capital in migrant families and to intergenerational transmission processes. The empirical analysis compares measurement for ethnic identification and network characteristics for the parent and the child generation as an indication of intergenerational transmission. It reveals considerable variability between migrant groups which can not be explained by classical assimilation theory and thus demonstrate the adequacy of the suggested model.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.240
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations33
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207