MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7034890452

Youth, Identity and the Search for Meaning:
\nA qualitative study of religion and spirituality among adolescents 
\nin contemporary Quebec

2014· dissertation· en· W7034890452 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquatic life and conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)Qualitative researchEthnic groupIdentity (music)PopulationCircumstantial evidenceInterpretation (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While changes in the Quebec’s immigration patterns and demographics over the past forty years are well researched, scholars have rarely investigated how young Quebeckers make sense of themselves and the world around them. Previous research on the topic of youth religiosity in Western countries (Campiche, 1997; Smith and Lundquist Denton, 2005; Crawford and Rossiter, 2006; Lefebvre, 2006; Roehlkepartain et al, 2008; Valk et al, 2009; Kimball et al, 2010) has outlined adolescents’ interest in questions of meaning and in learning about religions from an unbiased perspective. We addresses this issue by adding to the data we have on adolescents meaning-making strategies within a sociological perspective, and seeks to integrate the voice of adolescents to discussions on educational questions that are directly relevant to their development and wellbeing. 
\n
\nThis dissertation reports on a detailed investigation of seventeen Québécois teenagers’ lives and worldviews, using qualitative methods. Through an individual, semi-directed interview, 17 Montreal adolescents (nine girls and eight boys) between the ages of 14 and 19 (m = 16.05) were asked about their views on religion, spirituality, adolescence, the place of religion in society, as well as ethnic and religious diversity in their school, and their appreciation of the recently implemented Ethics and Religious Culture Program. We found that the participants to this study had a non-religious perspective, evidenced by a distrust of religious institutions and an absence of religious beliefs and practices, coupled with an interest for learning about religious culture and ethical questions, evidenced by a generally positive evaluation of the Ethics and Religious Culture Program.

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)0.003
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 score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.250 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicAquatic life and conservationFrench-language works237,207