MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387580699 · doi:10.32388/k3mr68

Resentment and Multiculturalism: Kymlicka’s Canada, Bonilla Maldonado’s Colombia and Modood’s UK

2023· preprint· en· W4387580699 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patrick Imbert

Bibliographic record

VenueQeios · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLatin American Literature Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResentmentMulticulturalismPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiculturalism is linked to theoretical approaches and social policies, which aims to encourage active interaction between groups and individuals in a given society. Multiculturalism has been theorized by the Canadian thinker Will Kymlicka who fosters a liberal democratic approach linked to Human Rights. In this article, Kymlicka’s approach is compared with Daniel Bonilla Maldono and Héctor Alonso Moreno Parra, two Colombian researchers who were influenced by Kymlicka and who are analysing the Colombian multicultural Constitution. Kymlicka is also compared with Tariq Modood who contextualizes multiculturalism within Islamic minorities in the UK and considers the impact of resentment in the dynamic of migration. Last but not least, the Canadian Doug Saunders presents the situation of migrants in slums and suburbs and emphasizes the relationship between economic well-being and multiculturalism. This leads us to contextualize these diverging perspectives on multiculturalism within the framework of a Girardian conception of human relations based on conflict and scapegoating. While comparing these different perspectives, the article underscores the fact that, until now, most thinkers did not sufficiently consider the impact of economic integration and the difference in educational credentials on the dynamics of recognition within the contemporary globalized knowledge-based society.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0290.011
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQeiosSame topicLatin American Literature StudiesFrench-language works237,207