Understanding Chinese international students’ perception of cultural conflicts in Canada: Through the case of cannabis use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The legalization of recreational cannabis consumption in Canada created a cultural conflict for international students from China, where the use of cannabis is heavily criminalized and deemed immoral. This conceptual paper theorizes this cultural conflict experienced by Chinese international students in Canada by applying three theories from macro to micro levels. Neoliberalism is first used to understand how this cultural conflict exposes collisions between the neoliberal West and the rising economic power of China as illustrated through Chinese students studying in Canada. Next, acculturation theory focuses on these students’ cultural transition and provides further insight into potential strategies for their handling of specific cultural conflicts such as cannabis use. Lastly, Cloninger’s theory of substance use is adopted to explore Chinese international students’ individual reasoning about cannabis use, particularly how they make decisions based on evaluations of various conditions. Building upon the above analyses, an integrated conceptual model is further formed to help us understand Chinese students’ potential perception of cannabis use in Canada. This conceptual framework provides an important theoretical and conceptual base for future research and practice, from which to further explore cannabis use in the context of cultural transition of different immigrant and migrant groups.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".