Article Social, Religious, and ‘Spirit-based ’ Capital within Cambodian and Lao Buddhist Communities in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract:While an extensive literature supports the correlation of social capital with newcomer adaptation and integration, few studies demonstrate the challenges faced by refugee communities with low levels of social and religious capital. Cambodian and Lao Buddhists in Ontario, Canada, have had significant resettlement struggles, particularly in their ability to re-create religious traditions and practices. Theravada Buddhist monks, who embody much of each community’s social and religious capital, face extensive adaptive modifications to meet the conflicting demands placed upon them. A new term, ‘‘spirit-based capital,’ ’ is introduced to present monastic interactions with the spirit world as a benefit for individual and community health and well-being. The predominant pneumacentric (spirit-centered) religiosity of first generation refugees suggests that spirit-based capital can play an important compensatory role for new-comers who lack other forms of social and religious capital. Résume ́ : Alors qu’une vaste littérature prend en charge la corrélation du capital social a ̀ l’adaptation des nouveaux arrivants et leur intégration, peu d’études montrent les difficultés rencontrées par les communautés de réfugiés avec de faibles niveaux de capital social et religieux. Bouddhistes cambodgiens et laotiens en Ontario, Canada, ont eu des luttes importantes de réinstallation, notamment dans leur capacite ́ a ̀ recréer les traditions et les pratiques religieuses. Moines bouddhistes de la tradition théravada, qui incarnent beaucoup du capital social et religieux de chaque communauté, font face à
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".