Social markers of acculturation : building a shared understanding in Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social Markers of Acculturation: Building a Shared Understanding in Japan Using the Keio Grant for the Development of Academic Research, my research about Social Markers of Acculturation ("SMA") has advanced in two ways: 1. First, I completed an academic paper about which SMA Japanese people expect immigrants to master to be socially accepted in Japanese society and workplaces. 2. Second, I could develop and test a quantitative measure of acceptance in Japanese society and workplaces for migrants in Japan. For #1 above, I completed a paper, "Constructing Who Can Be Japanese: A Study of Social Markers of Acceptance in Japan" which is now being reviewed for publication in an international journal. I presented this research at the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology's 24th International Congress, held at the University of Guelph in Guelph, Canada (July 2, 2018). This paper was delivered as part of a symposium, for which I was the chairperson, entitled, "Social Markers of Acculturation: The Accessibility and Process of Gaining Host Culture Acceptance for Immigrants in Five Nations." Based on the strength of this research, I have been invited to serve as the co-editor of a special edition of the International Journal of Intercultural Relations (published by Elsevier) to be published sometime in 2019, which will be devoted to research related to social markers of acceptance for immigrant populations around the world. For #2 above, I finished a paper, "A New Framework of Workplace Acculturation: The Need to Belong and Constructing Ontological Interpretive Spaces," which was accepted for publication in the journal Intercultural Communication for the July, 2018 issue. I presented this research at Ritsumeikan University's College of Business Administration (November 1, 2018) in a talk entitled, "National Group and Organizational Belonging: A New Framework for Successful Intercultural Communication in Business." Also, I recruited participants for a quantitative study to establish the validity and reliability of a survey designed to measure the two dimensions in my theoretical framework. Approximately 200 people have taken the survey so far, and I am continuing to recruit new participants to increase the reliability of the survey results. I have decided to use all of my budget of 200,000 yen to pay for the IACCP 24th International Congress at Guelph University because the costs of attending the conference exceeded the amount of this Keio Grant for the Development of Academic Research.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".