Factors and Ethical Values that Foster a Sense of Belonging Toward the Host Society: The Case of South Asian Communities in Montreal’s Parc-Extension Neighbourhood (Canada)
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
Place attachment studies developed scales for measuring the sense of belonging using a range of determinants. However, ethical values are rarely dealt with as such in the literature on belonging. The study's primary objective was thus to understand and rank the factors that, within an immigrant community whose culture of origin is somewhat different from that of the host society, foster development of a sense of place attachment (neighbourhood, city, state or country). Then, to grasp the role of ethical determinants in constructing a sense of place attachment, the study’s secondary objective was to see, also by ranking, which of the values present in the host society are perceived by members of immigrant communities as fostering their attachment to it. To attain these objectives, the study interviewed 40 adult members of South Asian communities living in a Montreal multiethnic neighborhood. The results show that interpersonal relations, low crime rate and infrastructures are the most important factors to foster place attachment, while fraternity, equality and safety are the most important ethical values.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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