The construction, composition and rationale of immigrants’ network: The support strategies of Ghanaian immigrants in Toronto, Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this article, we investigate the construction, composition and rationale behind the personal networks of recent immigrants to Canada. Drawing on egocentric‐network analysis and interviews with 172 Ghanaian immigrants in Toronto, we reveal their networking strategies during their integration. First, we identify social locations that help create ties with different groups: workplaces and schools offer access to ties with non‐immigrants and other immigrants alike, while religious and ethnic organizations facilitate ties to co‐nationals (i.e., Ghanaians). Second, most individuals within immigrants’ network are co‐nationals whose relationship began in Canada, followed by sustained transnational ties in the origin and diaspora and few ties with the non‐immigrant. The nature of this network is explained by examining the migration project of immigrants together with the context of reception in Canada, which suggests a desire by immigrants to stay in Canada and make Canada their second home. The implications of these findings are discussed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it