MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408434632 · doi:10.1093/jrs/feaf020

Lived Refuge: Gratitude, Resentment, Resilience By Vinh Nguyen

2025· article· en· W4408434632 on OpenAlexaff
Tam Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Refugee Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Historical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGratitudeResentmentResilience (materials science)PsychologySociologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What does ‘being a refugee’ mean? When does one stop being a refugee? In Lived Refuge, Vinh Nguyen (2023) attempts to problematize the seemingly clear and concrete legal–political definition of ‘refugee’ by closely reading literary works, poems, activism, and even deviances by Southeast Asian refugees. In doing so, Nguyen wishes to explore the concept of refuge experientially—he sees the act of storytelling, whether through writing or other forms, as a means to ‘make sense of being a refugee and living in refuge’ (xv). This way, the author participates in a tradition seeking to highlight the agency of refugees vis-a-vis the mechanistic state-sanctioned status. His main thesis is that the concept of refugee should be relational (instead of individualistic in the legal-political definition), continuous (instead of having a potential end date), dynamic (instead of an identity), and experiential (instead of a mere paperwork status). As part of the critical refugee studies tradition, where refugees are not conceptualized as an ‘object of investigation’, but as ‘intentionalized beings who possess and enact their own politics’ (Espiritu 2014: 10–11), Nguyen highlights the affects, actions, and stories of refugees as an alternative to a state-centered approach. Scholars of this tradition, such as Yen Le Espiritu, often highlight the value of refugees’ oral histories, whereby refugees memorialize their journey through the act of telling (Chapter 5 in her seminal book, Body Counts, is a classic example of this). Yet, in this book, the author differs in going beyond (collective) memory as a mechanism of refugee agency—he argues that an overreliance on memory fixes the refugee as one who must remember (or forget), thereby ‘reif[ying] [their] place (…) within a national and transnational schema’ (22). To be clear, this does not mean Nguyen is hostile to the memory project. Rather, the worry of reification here is rooted from the constant imposition of refugees as subjects who must remember something distinct from the state they fled. In other words, refugees’ subjectivity is defined by memory, concrete, and unchangeable, without thoroughly considering the complex process through which such a memory came to be.

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)0.006
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Refugee StudiesSame topicDiverse Historical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207