MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7001115746

The impact of cultural identity on future orientations among First Nations youth

2015· dissertation· en· W7001115746 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological and Temporal Perspectives Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousOptimismBiculturalismCultural identityMainstreamIdentity (music)AcculturationColonialism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study is an examination of Indigenous and Western culture influences on the construction of future orientations in youth. Future orientations were assessed in a group of First Nations and Western youth living in two separate communities in rural Quebec by using measures of optimism (Life Orientation Test – Revised; Scheier, Carver, & Bridges, 1985), career goals (Career-Related Goal Setting; Mu, 1998), self-perception (Self Perception Profile for Children; Harter, 1985), and final grades. Cultural identity with Indigenous and Western culture was assessed with an adapted biculturalism measure (Flanagan et al., 2011; Szapocznik, Kurtines, & Fernandez, 1980), while Indigenous cultural identity was further assessed with a measure of Historical Loss associated with colonialism (Whitbeck et al., 2004). Ninety-four students participated in this study, sixty-six of which identified as First Nations, and twenty-eight of which identified with mainstream Western culture. The results of this study suggest there are cultural differences in the construction of future orientations. Identification with an Indigenous culture was related to higher levels of optimism in a group of First Nations youth, and also seems to mitigate some of the negative effects of historical loss associated with colonialism in terms of optimism and grades. These results are consistent with the notion of cultural continuity serving as a protective factor for Indigenous youth (Chandler & Lalonde, 1998; Chandler et al., 2003). Overall, these findings indicate a need to better understand factors that influence how Indigenous youth perceive their future in order to promote successful future outcomes.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicPsychological and Temporal Perspectives ResearchFrench-language works237,207