FOR WHOM THE 'RETIREMENT' BELL TOLLS: INTER- TEMPORAL COMPARISONS USING THE 1994 AND 2002 CANADIAN GENERAL SOCIAL SURVEY.*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data from the 2002 and 1994 General Social Survey are used to analyze the determinants of retiring due to mandatory retirement and the expected age of retirement in Canada. Changes between 1994 and 2002 are decomposed into a component attributable to shifts in the composition of respondents and the other component to changes in the preferences and constraints of respondents, the latter playing a very important role for both outcomes. Specifically, between 1994 and 2002 we find: (1) a 1.3 percentage point drop in the probability of retiring due to mandatory retirement, with that drop due to preference/constraint changes substantially reducing the probability of retiring due to mandatory retirement but being almost offset by a change in the composition of the workforce that increased the probability of retiring due to mandatory retirement; and (2) a 3.7 year increase in the expected age of retirement, with that increase being almost exclusively attributable to preference and constraint shifts. The implications of these findings for employers, employees and policy makers are
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".