The differential value of symbolic capital: Occupational implications within varying social fields of practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background\nGlobalization is enabling greater mobility and the associated rise of international migration contributes to social change. As people migrate, they become embedded within varying fields of practice (i.e. social spaces or settings characterized by particular norms), such as workplaces. Within these fields, forms of symbolic capital (i.e. resources and assets) such as linguistic skills or educational credentials may be more highly valued than others (Bourdieu, 1997; Moore, 2008; Thomson, 2008).\nPurpose\nTo illustrate how the value of immigrants' capital within the host societies' fields influences their integration following migration and to examine the implications for their daily engagement in occupations.\nMethodology\nAn internationally comparative study of multinational migrants residing in London, Ontario, Canada and Auckland, New Zealand was conducted using an ethnographic approach.\nParticipants\nNineteen participants were purposefully recruited. Ten respondents (5 male, 5 female) participated in London and nine respondents (4 male, 5 female) participated in Auckland.\nData collection\nFirst, participants engaged in a narrative interview regarding their international migration. Second, they created an occupational map and described the occupations they engaged in within the places drawn. Finally, semi-structured interviews addressed shifts participants experienced to their occupations following migration.\nData analysis\nWe focus on findings from the theoretical analysis of the verbatim transcripts. This approach applied high-level codes from our framework including Bourdieu's concepts of field and capital. Findings were generated inductively from the data themselves and from our critically informed analysis and interpretation process (Huot et al., 2013; Ryan & Russell Bernard, 2003).\nResults\nOur analysis identified a range of fields within which the participants engaged in occupation. These were categorized as economic, educational, political, religious, socio-cultural, health care, and social services. Within each, the participants described how their varied forms of objective and embodied symbolic capital were differentially valued. Economic (e.g. finances), educational (e.g. degrees) and linguistic (e.g. fluency) capital were emphasized, among other forms of symbolic capital described.\nContribution to occupational science\nWhen immigrants' capital was valued, it served as an enabler to occupational engagement, whereas the devaluing of capital was a barrier to meaningful occupations that led many to have to try and acquire the necessary forms of capital that would facilitate their opportunities within specific fields.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it