MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1549911160 · doi:10.1300/j087v46n01_06

Cohabitation versus Marriage

2006· article· en· W1549911160 on OpenAlex
Geneviève Bouchard

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Divorce & Remarriage · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohabitationPsychologyMarital statusSocial psychologyDemographyLogistic regressionDevelopmental psychologyStatisticsPopulationSociologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study was aimed at investigating if the precursors of relationship dissolution vary according to union type (marriage or cohabitation). More specifically, this study examined the role of an important social psychological variable, dyadic adjustment, on relationship dissolution of cohabiting versus marital unions. A total of 117 married couples and 109 cohabiting couples completed a measure of dyadic adjustment, along with a demographic questionnaire. Two years later, the couples were asked to provide information on couple status (i.e., stable, separated, or divorced). As predicted, results of standard logistic regressions, controlled for relevant demographic variables, confirmed that cohabiting couples were more likely to end their relationship, even if it was still relatively satisfying, which was not the case for their married counterparts.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.359 · 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