Voluntary intra-national migration and the process of creating a place called home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is an investigation of the process by which intra-national migrants create a place called home. The collection and analysis of the data were based on the principles of grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Semi-structured interviews with 48 people that had moved to the Guelph area within the past five years were completed. The analysis of the data indicated that participants defined home places as geographic centres of fit, emotion, meaningful people and things, significant events, memories and routines, and local and specific knowledge. The process of creating a new place called home involved a continual and evolving pattern of learning about, engaging with, and modifying the environment. Men and women had different spatial responsibilities and priorities in this process, particularly at the community level. Because women were primarily responsible for finding, managing, coordinating, delegating, and screening a wide variety of spaces in the community for their families, their spatial pathways were more complex and emergent when compared to men's. A substantive theory of home suggests that creating a new place called home is a collaborative construction process with a pragmatic and present focus embedded within the everyday, and evolving over time as prior meanings of home informed and were reconciled with emergent meanings. This process operated on a geographic scale ranging from the immediate household space to community and work spaces, and was intimately tied to gender and identity. Additionally, because mobility created multiple home places located in a variety of spatial and temporal locations, the experience of home operated between dialectical tensions. Managing these tensions involved an ongoing process of resolving ambivalence.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".