MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416813810 · doi:10.70670/sra.v3i4.1299

Exploring the Intercultural Communication Experiences of Pakistani Immigrants in Canada

2025· article· W4416813810 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shah Nawaz Barich, Saima Murtaza Pandhiani, Zeeshan Ali Rahu, Samra Amjad

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial science review archives. · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Student and Expatriate Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntercultural communicationThematic analysisNonprobability samplingImmigrationQualitative researchPolitenessAccommodation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main aim of this study is to investigate the experiences of Pakistani immigrants on intercultural communication in engaging with the people of different cultures and languages for their pursuit of livelihood. The purposive sampling was followed in the selection of participants living in Mississauga, Vancouver and Toronto in Canada. The researcher conducted semi structured interviews of the eight participants of different age groups. The group of experts validated the collected data. This study is of qualitative approach, and the data was analyzed through the thematic analysis paradigm laid by Braun & Clark (2006). They had more personalized and nearer communication exchanges with greater politeness as they identified numerous barriers and bottlenecks to the way of developing the relational accommodation and space in Canadian culture. They also had some undesirable communication experiences of having free contact and access to public services. This study stands to be different one from the viewpoint of Pakistani immigrants. Effective means of intercultural communication involve a procedure of personal upbringing and self-reflection. It needs more self-awareness and assurance both on public and personal level for eradiating the undesirability among relationships of different cultures assembled at the same place as in Canada by being person-entered and public-centered intercultural communication.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0230.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial science review archives.Same topicInternational Student and Expatriate ChallengesFrench-language works237,207