MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7004947114

Parent and child attitudes towards educational and occupational achievement as a function of acculturation

2001· dissertation· en· W7004947114 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2001
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcculturationImmigrationPopulationOccupational prestigeEducational attainmentAcademic achievementFunction (biology)Cultural backgroundEthnic group
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As individuals and families move from India to Canada, they bring with them
\nthe values, attitudes, and beliefs they held in their native country. During the process
\nof building new lives in a new country the immigrants are immersed in a culture
\ndifferent then their own. As the East Indian immigrant population has grown, so has
\nthe number of first-generation, Canadian born children of East Indian parents. The
\nfocus of this study was to identify the relationship between acculturation and
\nattitudes held for both male and female children. In other words, this study looked at
\nthe relationship between cultural factors (as determined by the level of parental and
\nchild acculturation) within the family and attitudes toward occupational and
\neducational achievement for male and female children.
\nResults of this study found that East Indian parents placed significantly high
\nimportance on both academic success and occupational success for their sons and
\ndaughters. These expectations were understood and accepted by their children.
\nFinally, the importance with which parents viewed educational and occupational
\nachievements and their expectations for their children were not related to their level
\nof acculturation, their Canadian or Asian cultural values, or their level of endorsed
\nsex-role egalitarianism.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)Same topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207