MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405976441 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igae098.0627

THE IMPACT OF CULTURE ON CIVIC ENGAGEMENT OF AGING ASIAN IMMIGRANTS: FINDINGS FROM A MIXED STUDY IN EDMONTON, CANADA

2024· article· en· W4405976441 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hongmei Tong

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCreative Drama in Education
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationAsian americansCivic engagementGerontologyDemographic economicsPolitical scienceSociologyGender studiesMedicineAnthropologyEconomicsEthnic groupLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As a well-known immigrant-receiving country, Asian immigrants constitute most immigrants in Canada. However, the understanding of cultural diversity and intra-cultural similarities and differences among aging immigrants’ civic activities is limited. A mixed-methods study was conducted to examine civic participation experienced by Filipinos, Indians, and Chinese, since they are the three largest ethnocultural communities in Edmonton. Thematic analysis related to research questions was used for data analysis. Findings show diversity in the understanding of civic engagement and willingness, and their understanding and engagement in civic activities are affected by culture-related factors such as country of origin, time since immigration, citizenship status, greater official language proficiency, and pre-migration participation in activities. Public policies, such as immigration and integration policies (e.g., multiculturalism, diversity, and social inclusion), also influence immigrants’ civic participation. The findings suggest that cultural diversity should be considered in promoting civic activities among aging immigrants.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicCreative Drama in EducationFrench-language works237,207