Irina Schmitt: wir sind halt alle anders. Göttingen: V&R unipress 2008
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Irina Schmitt untersucht, wie Jugendliche aus verschiedenen Migrationskulturen in Deutschland auf ethnische wie geschlechtsbezogene Normativität reagieren. Als teilnehmende Beobachterin gab die Autorin den Jugendlichen die Möglichkeit, sich selbst in qualitativen Fragebögen, Interviews, Postern und Foto- bzw. Kassettentagebücher darzustellen. Ein Vergleich mit kanadischen Jugendlichen zeigt, wie eine Gesellschaft, die von Heterogenität bestimmt ist, auch den Jugendlichen mehr Möglichkeiten bietet, verschiedene Kulturen positiv wahrzunehmen.<br>Irina Schmitt examines how youth from differing migrant cultures in Germany react to ethnic and gender-oriented normativity. The author remained a participatory observer and allowed the youths the possibility of representing themselves in the form of qualitative surveys, interviews, posters, and photo or audio journals. A comparison with Canadian youths shows how a society that is determined by heterogeneity also offers youths more possibilities to positively experience different cultures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.447 | 0.305 |
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".