MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7098790695

ADDITIVE BILINGUALS: THE CASE OF POST-WAR SECOND GENERATION JAPANESE CANADIAN YOUTHS Hitomi Oketani Eastern Michigan Univ

2007· article· en· W7098790695 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Ecology and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)Interpersonal communicationIdentity (music)Interpersonal relationshipEnglish as a second languageLanguage proficiencyVariety (cybernetics)Metropolitan areaNeuroscience of multilingualism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the relations among bilinguality, academic achievement, and socio-psychological factors such as ethnolinguistic identity and beliefs, first language (L1) educational support, and interpersonal contacts. The participants were 42 second generation Japanese Canadian youths living in the metropolitan Toronto area. All had attended one particular Japanese Heritage Language School around the late 1970s; however the lengths of time they had attended Japanese language institutions varied. Students' bilingual proficiencies were assessed in both English and Japanese. Detailed questionnaires were administered to analyze socio-psychological factors. A strong relationship was found between Japanese oral and reading skills and both were related to a variety of ethnolinguistic identity, belief, and interpersonal contact variables. Japanese reading scores positively predicted both English reading and academic achievement (Ontario Academic Credit) performance. This ...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Ecology and Taxonomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207