Political Activism Among Second Generation Tibetans in the 21st Century: The Construction and Negotiation of Identity in Transnational Social Spaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the majority of the studies have looked at transnational political activism among the first generation, it is clear that the experiences of the second generation is limited to a significant degree, especially in regards to the experiences of second generation Tibetan youth. Consequently, by drawing on the experiences of second generation Tibetan youth who attended the ‘March 10 political demonstration’ in Toronto, this study explores transnationalism and identity construction among the second generation within transnational social spaces. The findings of this study of six second generation Tibetan youths show that the second generation is highly selective in its transnational practices, as their level of participation is dependent on other commitment and responsibilities they may have in their personal lives. With regards to their identity, the findings indicate that they held both Tibetan and Canadian identities as they held hybrid, fluid, and situational identities that was based on having loyalties to both Canada and Tibet. Ultimately, this study reveals that the second generation are constantly negotiating their fluid and hybrid identities, as they are receiving different opposing ideas and information flows that allows them to connect with both their homeland in Tibet and Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".