MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106518853 · doi:10.29173/cais1125

“You Made a Great Mistake…you left the [your] Job and Moved to Canada”: A Study on the Information Experiences of Bangladeshi Immigrants in Canada

2020· article· fr· W3106518853 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nafiz Zaman Shuva, Paulette Rothbauer

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationHumanitiesSociologyMistakeEthnologyGeographyPolitical scienceArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports on key findings from a recently completed doctoral study into the transitional information behaviour of Bangladeshi immigrants to Canada. The study uses a mixed method approach including semi-structured interviews (n=60) and surveys (n=205) with Bangladeshi immigrants who arrived in Canada between the years of 1971 and 2017. We discuss the information experience of participants in terms of their personal networks, information sharing fear, and information intelligence. Cet article rend compte des principales conclusions d'une étude doctorale récemment achevée sur le comportement informationnel des immigrants bangladais au Canada. L'étude utilise une approche mixte comprenant des entrevues semi-structurées (n = 60) et des enquêtes (n = 205) auprès d'immigrants bangladais arrivés au Canada entre 1971 et 2017. Nous discutons de l'expérience informationnelle des participants en ce qui conerne leurs réseaux personnels, la peur du partage d'informations et l'intelligence informationnelle.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0270.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSISame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207