International migration, cross-cultural interaction, and the development of personal wisdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Drawing on semi-structured in-depth interviews with Romanian immigrants in Ontario, Canada, conducted between 2014 and 2018, this article explores how the experiences acquired by the Romanian immigrants through migration and multicultural intercourse facilitate the development of personal wisdom. We show how our research participants perceived these geographical processes of migration and place-based multiethnic cohabitation to account for their growing wiser than their earlier selves. Specifically, we organize the description of these perceptions into three interrelated themes: (1) changes in perspective, (2) the learning of new things, and (3) the role of place in fostering wisdom. Against this background, the article also highlights the boundary conditions within which these processes may or may not foster the development of wisdom, acknowledging that not all migratory and multicultural experiences lead to prosocial and adaptive outcomes. Our discussion of these boundary conditions with the research participants coalesced into five recurrent themes: (1) adaptation to the new environment and social system, (2) the role of the host environment as a boundary condition, (3) the problem of unmet expectations, (4) the magnitude of the cultural shocks, and (5) the language barrier. Bearing the complex politics of these boundary conditions in mind, we argue that the experience of international migration and subsequent cross-cultural interaction can be usefully understood as a ‘fertile ground’ for the flourishing of personal wisdom, which itself can act as an individual and collective resource for cohabitation in multicultural settings.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| 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".