MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6973787568 · doi:10.58002/99bj-9587

Open Forum: Factors and Ethical Values that Foster a Sense of Belonging Toward the Host Society: The Case of South Asian Communities in Montreal’s Parc-Extension Neighbourhood (Canada)

2021· article· en· W6973787568 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMax Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPlace Attachment and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSense of communitySense of placeImmigrationNeighbourhood (mathematics)Interpersonal relationshipHost (biology)Interpersonal communicationSouth asia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Place attachment studies developed scales for measuring the sense of belonging using a range of determinants. However, ethical values are rarely dealt with as such in the literature on belonging. This study’s primary objective was thus to understand and rank the factors that, within an immigrant community whose culture of origin is somewhat different from that of the host society, foster development of a sense of place attachment (neighbourhood, city, state, or country). Then, to grasp the role of ethical determinants in constructing a sense of place attachment, the study’s secondary objective was to see, also by ranking, which of the values present in the host society are perceived by members of immigrant communities as fostering their attachment to it. To attain these objectives, the study interviewed forty adult members of South Asian communities living in a Montreal multiethnic neighbourhood. The results show that interpersonal relations, low crime rate and infrastructures are the most important factors to foster place attachment, while fraternity, equality and safety are the most important ethical values.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMax Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic DiversitySame topicPlace Attachment and Urban StudiesFrench-language works237,207