Illuminating regional identity: An interdisciplinary exploration in Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT\nBoth inside and outside of academia, people have sought to understand the “sense of place” of various regions, many times over and for many different reasons. The concept of regional identity is highly complex and surrounded by considerable contention. There are multiple bodies of research on regional identity theory in many different disciplines and even across sub-disciplinary classifications. Each discipline takes a slightly different angle or perspective on regional identity, resulting in a fragmented body of work on this topic overall. There is a need to consolidate this body of increasingly fragmented theory through interdisciplinary integration. For the purpose of this study, the province of Saskatchewan will serve as an exemplar for exploring regional identity in a concrete context. Saskatchewan can be thought of as a ‘functional region,’ with clear boundaries and clear residency, from which regional identity can be studied. This thesis shares the outcomes of a qualitative study grounded in a series of group interviews with Saskatchewan residents, from which it is concluded that the use of interdisciplinary theory is an appropriate approach to the study of regional identity. Regional identity cannot be compartmentalized; it is a web of characteristics, attributes, and feelings that are inextricably linked. The thesis thus concludes by offering lessons learned about how we might better understand regional identity, as illuminated through both interdisciplinary theory and the lived experiences and imaginations of people living in the region of Saskatchewan.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".