A Thematic Analysis of Perceptions of Adversity, Protective Factors, and Competence among Colombian Immigrant Youth in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using an ecological framework, this study investigated how the resilience-related concepts of competence, adversity, and protective factors were defined by Colombian immigrant youth living in Canada. Ten Colombian immigrant youth, aged 14 to 19 years, were interviewed about their perceptions of ‘doing well’, the main challenges they experienced after arriving in Canada, and the factors that helped them overcome their major challenges. Qualitative thematic analysis was used to analyze the youth’s responses. Youth described how familism played a central role in the perceptions of competence and doing well. It was also found that the main challenges that were reported were general experiences of immigration and the difficulties of adapting into the new cultural environment and not to cultural discrepancies or clashes of values and beliefs. These youth talked about a range of protective factors, which included meaningful relationships (i.e., family, peers, God), individual factors (i.e., coping strategies, change in mindset, personal qualities, previous experiences, setting goals, and language brokering) and environmental factors (i.e., media, school environment, extracurricular activities, and community).
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".