MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005392589

Politically Speaking: Participation of Indigenous Women in Canada and the Importance of Intersectionality and Indigenous Resurgence

2023· dissertation· en· W7005392589 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPoliticsIdentity (music)IntersectionalityColonialismIndigenous rights
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current political climate, the efforts of Indigenous women in the advancement of Indigenous rights have not gone unnoticed. Particularly, in 2012 the Idle No More movement gained attention across Canada and throughout the world, with Indigenous women front and centre, leading the fight against the destruction of land and working towards advancing the rights of Indigenous peoples. Importantly, the ways in which Indigenous women engage politically has continued to evolve and there is a need to document and understand the changes that are occurring. This research seeks to examine the changes in political participation among Indigenous women by looking at the influence that identity and community connections have on political involvement. Employing the theories of both intersectionality and Indigenous resurgence, the material presented examines the personal experiences of Indigenous women to gain a better understanding of what motivates them to become involved, what barriers they face, and how they have participated. This research uses the voices and experiences of Indigenous women to show how identity and community impact their political participation. It is shown that through everyday acts of resistance, Indigenous women contribute to wider collective goals of Indigenous resurgence. Indigenous women’s motivation is rooted in their identity and based on the need to address colonialism and provide a more sustainable environment for future generations. A multi- methods approach is used, that included surveys and interviews. Indigenous women over the age of 18-years-old and residing in Canada were sought out for participation. A total of 86 surveys were collected and analyzed. Surveys were used to let those involved guide the issues that would be explored further during the interviews. By using quantitative and qualitative research methods, a decolonizing framework has been employed to properly account for the experiences of Indigenous women. Originally, interviews were to be done in-person. However, as a result of the global pandemic, participants were able to choose to be interviewed over the phone or via video call. A total of 13 interviews were conducted over the phone. Findings show that identity is a highly contested topic among Indigenous women that plays an important role in how they participate. Identity and political participation have a mutually beneficial relationship. In other words, identity encourages participation, and participation supports identity. While identity can be a motivating factor in how one participates politically, providing support and encouragement, it can also discourage participation through feelings of not belonging. Community connections were shown to have only a positive influence on political participation, providing individuals with a network of support and producing more opportunities for involvement. However, one does not need to have a connection to the community to participate politically, and having a connection does not guarantee participation. Overall, both community connections and identity are shown to influence the political participation of Indigenous women in different ways. It is demonstrated throughout this research that Indigenous women are continually engaging in everyday acts of resistance with a wider goal of Indigenous resurgence. It is hoped that by finding out what motivates and deters participation among Indigenous women, efforts can be directed towards reducing barriers and developing programs that increase motivation for involvement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0240.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor)Same topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207