"Being connected to my Shuswap family in the south": a reflective inquiry into the social media experiences of Indigenous youth in Northern and rural British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research extends and explores two key concepts. First, cultural preservation is important to Indigenous health and wellbeing. Second, when Indigenous youth spend quality time (whether online or offline) on issues pertaining to their identity and sense of self, that time can be key to preserving Indigenous cultures. This research project was an exploratory study carried out using a variety of research methods, including online surveys, semistructured interviews, and open ended storytelling engagements. In this study, youth ages 15 to 24 years interacted with one another in online and offline spaces, which in some cases served as culturally safe wellbeing sites where their self-esteem increased, especially if they were mentored by Indigenous peers and adults. This study found out that Indigenous youth are active social media users and engage in all kinds of activities including self presentation, social connections, cultural activities, and advocacy. The risks and benefits of using social media for identity expression and cultural engagement were identified, but some youth were noted to require supports to engage safely on social media to derive maximum benefits. The interdisciplinary nature of the research merges concepts, theories, and ideas from First Nations Studies, Sociology, Community Health, and Media Studies. This project embraced methodologies employed in these various disciplines but used a Two-Eyed Seeing framework as a tool to ensure cohesiveness in the research and respect for Indigenous cultures and cultural protocols. The research ultimately unfolded using lenses of both Indigenous and nonIndigenous worldviews, which I believe contributed greatly to the richness of the findings.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".