MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387508471 · doi:10.7202/1106287ar

Identité ethnolinguistique et bien-être mental : le cas des jeunes francophones du Manitoba

2022· article· fr· W4387508471 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Annabel Levesque, Ndèye Rokhaya Gueye, Danielle de Moissac, Hélène Archambault, Étienne Rivard

Bibliographic record

VenueAlterstice Revue internationale de la recherche interculturelle · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Saint-Boniface
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesFrenchSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’identité collective est reconnue comme un facteur important pouvant contribuer au bien-être mental des individus appartenant à des minorités ethnolinguistiques. Or peu de recherches ont porté sur le cas des jeunes francophones en contexte minoritaire canadien, notamment les francophones du Manitoba. Cette recherche visait donc à analyser la relation entre le bien-être mental des jeunes francophones du Manitoba et trois dimensions de l’identité ethnolinguistique, soit l’attachement à l’identité francophone, l’attachement à l’identité anglophone et la perception de continuité ethnolinguistique. Un total de 545 francophones du Manitoba, âgés de 14 à 25 ans, ont répondu à un questionnaire. Les résultats révèlent que, bien qu’elles soient liées, les trois dimensions de l’identité ethnolinguistique en contexte francophone minoritaire représentent bel et bien des construits distincts. Par ailleurs, chacune de ces dimensions est liée de façon positive au bien-être mental des répondants. En somme, ces résultats illustrent l’importance de maintenir les efforts visant à promouvoir la vitalité ethnolinguistique des communautés francophones minoritaires et à soutenir les jeunes dans leur quête visant à intégrer leurs identités multiples.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlterstice Revue internationale de la recherche interculturelleSame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207