MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4239115996 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14652162.v1

"If We Don't Do It For Our Parents, Then Who Will?" Afghan Youth as Cultural/Language Brokers

2021· preprint· en· W4239115996 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shabnam Sarwary

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAfghanNegotiationImmigrationSettlement (finance)Political scienceCultural issuesSociologyGender studiesCultural diversityBusinessSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper looks at the role that immigrant adolescents play as cultural/language brokers for their families. Research shows that immigrant adolescents play exceptionally supportive roles as cultural/language brokers for their families during the early years of settlement. There is limited research examining this phenomenon of cultural brokering by immigrant adolescents in Canada, and perhaps no particular research focusing on Afghan youth. The paper presents insights from nine Afghan youth who through their cultural/language brokering are important sources of support for their families during settlement. It will also include a compilation of previous literature on this area. Despite the struggles of negotiating with their role as cultural/language brokers in the early years, the youth generally shared positive experiences of being able to be a source of assistance for their families. Additionally, the participants viewed their role as a cultural/language broker to be a part of their familial responsibility

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)0.003
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.331 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration, Health and Trauma→French-language works237,207→