Cultural learning in the adjustment process of academic expatriates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recent rise in academic expatriates brings to the forefront the need for research to further explore this specific group of self-initiated expatriates. The purpose of this research is to study the relationship between cultural learning and adjustment of academic expatriates. Cultural learning of an academic expatriate is the strengthening and development of his/her cultural understanding, competence, and intelligence, whilst adjustment is the personal, social, and work adaptation leading to feelings of comfort towards the environment and better functioning. The main hypothesis is that increased cultural learning, which is manifested as cultural competence, is linked to well-adjusted academic expatriates. The dual theoretical framework is the theory of cultural learning and the model of cultural adjustment. The study was carried out amongst 103 academic expatriates in the UAE using quantitative methodology. The main conclusions are that: academic expatriates in the UAE are culturally competent and well adjusted; there is a positive relationship between cultural competence and adjustment in academic expatriates; cultural competence and adjustment increase with years of experience and age; expatriates from different cultural backgrounds to the host country adjust better and are more culturally competent.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".