MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144751714 · doi:10.1080/00050067.2021.1893601

Identity and belonging: refugee youth and their parents’ perception of being Australian

2021· article· en· W3144751714 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Psychologist · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsWorkplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission
FundersAustralian Research Council
KeywordsRefugeeThematic analysisIdentity (music)AcculturationEthnic groupAsylum seekerGender studiesAmbivalencePsychologyQualitative researchSocial psychologySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People from refugee backgrounds can experience identity issues living between two cultures. Identity development for adolescents and youth, is further complicated by simultaneously having to navigate between childhood and adulthood, and expectations of parents, ethnic community, and host society.Objective: This study with refugee-background youth and adults, explored participants’ perceptions of being Australian and their sense of belonging, after migrating to Australia.Method: Study sample included a multiethnic sample of 79 participants: 46 refugee background youth, 15-26 years and 33 parents or significant family members residing in South Australia. Participants had migrated to Australia from the Middle East, South Asia, or Africa, between 1 and 15 years ago. We used a semi-structured interview protocol and data-based thematic analysis to collect and analyse individual interviews.Results: We identified the themes of acceptance, ambivalence, confusion, and rejection of an Australian identity in both youth and parent interviews, although youth interviews were more eloquent and nuanced. While most participants accepted an Australian identity and considered Australia their “home” for reasons of safety, opportunities and support available to them, others opted for a dual identity combining elements from Australia and heritage country. A few participants rejected an Australian identity but still considered Australia “home”.KEY POINTSWhat is known about this topic: Refugee-background people generally do not settle in the same way as other migrants due to pre-migration trauma and stressors associated with the resettlement process.The sociocultural and psychological challenges of negotiating acculturation are another important factors impacting on settlement outcomes for refugee-background migrants.Acculturation entails a degree of identity uncertainty, conflict and the need for identity reconstruction.What is new about the topic: Identity development and reconstruction presented on a continuum from acceptance of an Australian identity including a dual identity, ambivalence and confusion, to rejection of an Australian identity.The vast majority of refugee-background youth and parents considered themselves “Australian” and that Australia was their “home”.The perceptions of racism and discrimination affected participants’ identity development and reconstruction after resettlement although their resettlement outcomes appear to be minimally impacted.

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.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.306 · 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