MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255055378 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14668140

Enacting Ethnicity of “Japanese Canadian” in Oral History: A Comparison Between the Japanese Canadian Sansei and the Ijusha Nisei

2021· preprint· en· W4255055378 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shunya Kawai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicOral History, Memory, Narrative Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismIdeologyEthnic groupNegotiationGender studiesIdentity (music)Identity negotiationCitizenshipSociologyCollective identityImmigrationOral historyPolitical scienceAnthropologySocial scienceAestheticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the non-essentializing analysis of ethnic identity formation in comparative research between two groups in the Japanese Canadian community: the Japanese Canadian Sansei and the Ijusha Nisei. Using an oral history approach to understand the development of ethnic identity, I discuss how the social assignment of “otherness” based on the corporeal difference has negatively influenced identity formation in both groups. My comparative analysis further uncovers some of the different strategies that each group takes against the racializing process. Whereas the Japanese Canadian Sansei claim their cultural citizenship in the history of Japanese Canadians by aligning their own personal past with the collective memory of Japanese Canadians, the Ijusha Nisei negotiate it by entitling themselves as a contemporary representative of the ideology of multiculturalism. Finally, understanding the different processes of ethnic identity formation and strategies of negotiation for social inclusion, I discuss the effects of the ideology of multiculturalism on cultural citizenship among Japanese Canadians.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0150.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 topicOral History, Memory, Narrative AnalysisFrench-language works237,207