MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220943483 · doi:10.1177/21676968221087072

A Qualitative Exploration of Information and Communication Technology Use among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer Emerging Adult Migrants Before and After Arrival in the United States

2022· article· en· W4220943483 on OpenAlexafffund
Edward J. Alessi, Shannon Cheung, Michael P. Dentato, Andrew D. Eaton, Shelley L. Craig

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging Adulthood · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Regina
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsICTSLesbianInformation and Communications TechnologyTransgenderQueerIdentity (music)SociologyGender studiesHarassmentGrounded theoryQualitative researchPolitical sciencePsychologySocial psychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information and communication technologies (ICTs) have been shown to facilitate LGBTQ+ emerging adult development as well as international migration. Nonetheless, few studies have examined pre- and post-migration ICT use among LGBTQ+ emerging adult migrants. To fill this knowledge gap, we conducted online interviews with 37 LGBTQ+ individuals (ages 20–25) who migrated from various countries to different U.S. states. Constructivist grounded theory was used to identify four themes: In and out: Balancing identity exploration with identity concealment when using ICTs in the country of origin; relying on ICTs to prepare for migration to the United States; using ICTs to find housing, work, and friends in the United States; and drawbacks of using ICTs in the United States. ICTs facilitated identity development and eased integration but exposed participants to harassment and scams. Findings indicate that closely investigating ICT use can enhance developmental and migration theories, improve research, and inform programs and services.

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)0.005
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerging AdulthoodSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207