“Contextualizing Immigrant Religious Participation: A Test of Religious Heterogeneity and Religious Proportionality”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the recent terrorist attacks in the United States and Britain, the topics of religion and immigration have received increased attention. This present situation has caused a recurring question to emerge: what factors influence the rise or fall of immigrant religious participation? Unfortunately, a lack of available data has made it difficult for researchers to address factors that may contribute to the increase of immigrant religious participation. However, theories from the sociology of migration and religion point towards two possible factors within the immigrant’s context of settlement that bear an influence on immigrant religious participation- religious heterogeneity (i.e. religious pluralism) and religious proportionality (i.e. ethnic enclave theory). In this paper, tests for the competing viewpoints within the religious heterogeneity and religious proportionality hypotheses are conducted using recent data from the Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Canada.1 Results indicate that increased religious heterogeneity increases religious participation for religious groups besides Protestants and Catholics. Increased religious proportionality decreases religious participation among Protestants and Catholic immigrants but increases religious participation of immigrants belonging to
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".