Shame, Identity, and Well-being in Métis Autobiographical Literature: A Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This narrative review explores the intersections of shame, identity, and well-being in Métis experiences, as depicted in autobiographical literature. Despite governmental recognition, Métis identity remains ambiguously defined, impacting their integration into federal health policies. This analysis underscores how racism and discrimination shape Métis identity and well-being and are influenced by socio-economic determinants. Central to Métis worldview is Wahkotowin which emphasizes relationality and interconnectedness. This paper considers Wahkotowin to understand the complex relationship between identity and well-being. Historical alliances like the Nehiyaw Pwat Confederacy exemplify kinship ties that have been disrupted by colonial policies, which further marginalize Métis connections with their Indigenous kin. This review of autobiographic works reveals the legacy of shame, both externally imposed and internally experienced by the Métis, which stems from colonial subjugation. These narratives provide profound insights into the impact of shame on Métis identity and kinship bonds. Acknowledging data limitations, this review advocates for further research into the nuanced effects of shame on Métis well-being. It calls for the adoption of distinction-based methodologies in healthcare and culturally sensitive interventions. Restoring historical kinship ties emerges as a central theme through this paper as essential for collective healing and the affirmation of Métis identity and well-being.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".