Experiences of Afghan-Canadian language and cultural advisors who served with Canadian forces abroad: an interpretive phenomenological analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Though much research has been conducted on the potential well-being effects of deployment on armed forces members, a significant gap seems to exist in the literature when it comes to its effect on conflict-zone interpreters. Drawing on the experiences of six former Afghan-Canadian Language and Cultural Advisors (LCAs), this paper aims to contribute to expanding the nascent literature on conflict-zone interpreters by exploring how former LCAs perceive their experiences before, during, and after their deployment and the resulting impacts on their well-being. Interested in an in-depth exploration of the experiences of former LCAs, this study employed an interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA) approach. Through the analysis, four superordinate themes emerged in participants’ narratives including: (1) the right opportunity, referring to the reasons for becoming an LCA; (2) overcoming challenges, when it comes to the work itself; (3) deserving better, relating to the experience returning to post-service life; and (4) moving forward, speaking to the current reality of participants. The results reveal key insights into the unique experiences and support needs of former Afghan-Canadian LCAs included in the study, offering an in-depth account of their experience before, during and after their service. The findings also offer important considerations regarding the support available not just to interpreters but to all contractors deployed in conflict-zones.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".