Negotiating "cultural" identities: exploration of young Asian women's racialized-gendered experiences and mental well-being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Explanations of mental health outcomes of Asian women in diaspora are often invoked through the concepts of “culture” and “acculturation” with little consideration of asymmetric power relations and structural influences. Informed by critical theories and a narrative approach, this secondary research analyzed data of an exploratory study with fourteen 1.5 and second generation young Asian women living in Toronto, Canada. Research results include: (1) identity construction is a complex process shaped by participants’ experiences in both the “mainstream” and “heritage” contexts; (2) participants’ encounters of racialized-sexism, microaggressions, and “Othering” contributed to varying degrees of internalized oppressions, which compromised their mental well-being; (3) family support and community engagement enhanced participants’ positive self-concept and resilience; and (4) current conceptualizations of “acculturation” and “enculturation” are inadequate as they negate the structural determinants of integration. Nursing research, policy and practice must consider the effects of structural factors in identity construction and mental well-being.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".