Bangladeshi Migrants in Ottawa: A Socio-Spatial Analysis Through an Intersectional Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis applies Koinova’s (2021) spatial linkages framework and Rodó-Zárate’s (2023) emotional geographic approach to explore how Bangladeshi migrants in Ottawa perceive their positionality in local and transnational landscapes. Organized under the themes of geographies of othering, geographies of togetherness, and familial ties, key findings address how migrants experience exclusion based on identity markers, which spaces enable cultural expression through practices like adda, and how family dynamics influence migrants' personal aspirations and cultural values while shaping their understanding of their socio-spatial positionality. These findings demonstrate the fluidity of migrants’ socio-spatial positionality, shifting across contexts and interactions. The study also reflects on the challenges of ethical considerations, participant recruitment, and the emotional toll of people-centered research. It recommends integrating mixed methods, exploring virtual spaces, and examining power dynamics within migrant communities. This research contributes to human geography by amplifying migrant voices and applying socio-spatial and intersectional concepts to lived experiences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".