MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4256181495 · doi:10.22215/etd/2013-09904

The Identity Formation Experiences of Second Wave Argentinian Immigrants to Canada

2013· dissertation· en· W4256181495 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pamela Groh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationIdentity (music)FeelingIdentity formationQualitative researchIdentification (biology)Gender studiesSocial capitalParticipant observationSociologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologyPsychologySocial scienceSelf-conceptAestheticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The thesis explores the processes of identity formation among high-skilled Argentinian immigrants to Canada’s National Capital Region on the basis of a mixed method qualitative research consisting of 14 interviews with Argentinian professionals who migrated to Canada since 1999, participant observation and the analysis of Internet blogs. The thesis examines the identity formation experiences of these immigrants as the “meeting point” of social conditions of migration and personal practices of reacting, reflecting and feeling. Approaching identity as fluid, relational, strategic, positional, and always developing, I argue that the ‘new’ identities that Argentinian immigrants have developed are linked to two main relational processes, namely identification and differentiation. By critically examining the ‘location’ of these immigrants in Canadian society, I suggest the group’s experiences of integration and marginalization are interconnected to these relational processes influencing their notions of who they are in 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 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)0.002
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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.362 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207