MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185148045 · doi:10.1163/25892525-bja10016

Cosmopolitanism, Sociability and Assemblages of Symbolic Resources among Youths Attracted by Islam

2021· article· en· W3185148045 on OpenAlexaffabout
Géraldine Mossière

Bibliographic record

VenueSecular Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCosmopolitanismIslamSociologyNegotiationRhetoricNarrativeGender studiesEthnographySocial sciencePolitical scienceAnthropologyPoliticsGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract On the basis of ethnographic fieldwork carried out among youths living in Montreal (Canada) who are interested in Islam and adopt some elements of a Muslim lifestyle, I show how affinities with Islam arise from sociability practices with friends of Muslim background and relate to the cultural diversification of secular societies. By combining network analysis with narrative analysis, I examine how youths interpret and make sense of these interactions and propose a critical view of their cosmopolitan discourses. While the latter is grounded in a universalist rhetoric, I argue it also unfolds within the intimacy of sociability experiences and shared emotions. Youth’s cosmopolitanism draws on cultural repertoires that stem from public education programs and local strategies to promote peaceable cohabitation in secular contexts. Consequently, youth competencies for cosmopolitanism lead to ongoing conversations that make differences and divergences within sociability spaces new sites to negotiate intercultural encounters in highly diversified localities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.388 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSecular StudiesSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207