MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413833752 · doi:10.1080/00083968.2025.2530440

Many are called, few are chosen: religion and migration capabilities in Ghanaian pathways to Canada

2025· article· en· W4413833752 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
James Kwateng-Yeboah

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africaines · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceSociologyEconomic geographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the early 2000s, scholarly interest in continental African migration to Canada has grown, but existing research has focused more on integration outcomes than on the conditions that enable migration. Drawing on semi-structured interviews and ethnographic observations among Ghanaian immigrants in Ontario, this article examines how religion – particularly Pentecostal-Charismatic Christianity – shapes the migration capabilities of contemporary African migrants. It reveals that these capabilities are influenced not only by immigration laws and state policies but also by religious resources, such as social capital from transnational churches, religious concepts of the “good life,” and migratory rituals involving prayer, fasting and travel secrecy. The article contributes to the limited scholarship on Black and African immigrant religions in Canada by showing how religion empowers migration amid structural barriers. It challenges state-centric models by foregrounding how migrants draw on culturally meaningful and spiritually grounded practices to navigate uncertainty, sustain hope and transform aspiration into mobility.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africainesSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207