"A Mind Spread Out on the Ground:" Urban Indigenous Experiences of Grief and Bereavement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Of the 1.8 million Indigenous Peoples residing on the lands known as Canada, nearly half live in urban areas. Urban spaces themselves are built on traditional Indigenous territory. In some cases, Indigenous Peoples are born and raised in cities that exist on their territories, in other cases, Indigenous Peoples may have migrated to cities or were born there, away from their own ancestral lands. Being an urban Indigenous Person often means that our ties to cultural connection have been disrupted to some degree (Barker 2019). Studies have shown that Indigenous People are overrepresented in several key mortality related measures, such as violent death and premature death. Given this information, this study examines urban Indigenous experiences of colonization, culture, and grief to determine what impacts colonization and culture have had on meaningful and culturally relevant healing experiences. The study collaboratively works with 15 self-identified urban Indigenous Peoples from age 21-84, located in or near amiskwaciwâskahikan (Edmonton). It uses qualitative and Indigenous methodologies to answer the following primary questions: how do urban Indigenous Peoples experience grief and what support systems exist for them, if any? Sub-questions that we addressed were: do people have access to culturally relevant grief support? If yes, what does that look like and if no, how can we enable it? Findings indicate that urban Indigenous experiences of grief are influenced in complex ways by colonization, unresolved trauma, and culture. Within the psychological and sociological literature on grief, the study shows how urban Indigenous experiences of grief can be understood as ‘disenfranchised,’ using Kenneth Doka’s concept of disenfranchised grief.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".