<i>En français</i> or in English? Examining Perceived Social Roles of International Students in Response to Their French and English Speech
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada’s growing population of international students brings ethnolinguistic diversity and socioeconomic benefits to their host communities. However, students often experience social exclusion and lack of belonging, reporting little communication with local community members for many cultural, ethnic, and religious reasons. The present study, conducted in Montreal, investigated the role of international students’ second language speech in local community members’ perception of the social roles that students can assume in a host society (e.g., friend, neighbour, colleague). Four English- and French-speaking international students’ recordings were presented to 38 francophones, all non-student residents of Montreal, who evaluated the students’ comprehensibility and accentedness and assessed how acceptable these students were in various social roles (e.g., friend, neighbour, colleague) in two languages (French vs. English) and in two situations (making a request vs. making a potentially controversial statement). The students’ ratings were greater when they spoke French than English (regardless of speech content) and when they requested help than when they expressed a controversial statement (regardless of language). Social ratings were generally associated with comprehensibility, not accentedness, where more comprehensible speech was linked to greater perceived acceptability. Findings highlight the importance of sociolinguistic context and language in local residents’ judgments of international students’ social roles.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".