MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161787705 · doi:10.82308/12576

The relationship between acculturation and positively and negatively defined mental health for the Iranian migrant community of Canada /

2003· dissertation· en· W7161787705 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maziar M. Taleshi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcculturationMental healthReligiositySalience (neuroscience)Ethnic groupImmigrationDistressPsychological distress

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a paucity of research literature on the relationship between acculturation and positive indices of mental health for migrant populations. The objective of this study is to investigate the nature of this relationship for the Iranian migrant community of Canada. Eighty-six Iranian migrants living in Montreal and Toronto filled a self-report questionnaire. Acculturation was measured through an acculturation attitude, overt behavioural and self-report Canadian contact scales. Positive mental health was measured through WHO's cross-culturally validated subjective quality of life (SQOL) scale and the level of psychological distress was measured with the SCL-25. Pertinent demographic variables were considered to control for intra-group differences. Moreover, since data collection for this project occurred just after the events of September 11 we partially modified our research plan to include specific questions on the impact of this even. Because of its overt politicization and its salience to Iranian ethnicity we also sought to explore the effect of religiosity on mental health of this group. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207