MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1907980298 · doi:10.25336/p6d88h

Cultural influence, economic security, and the fertility behavior of the Chinese in Canada

2001· article· en· W1907980298 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Zongli Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Studies in Population · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertilityImmigrationContext (archaeology)Demographic economicsChinese communityChinaGeographySociologyDemographyEconomicsPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores interactions of cultural influence and economic insecurity and their effects on the fertility behavior of the Chinese in Canada. The importance of group context on the actions of individuals is measured through data from the PUST of the 1971 and 1991 Canadian Censuses. Contextual analysis and random coefficient models are the major statistical tools employed to achieve the above objectives. The Chinese-Canadians are compared to the British-Canadians, who are used as the reference group. The findings suggest that Chinese reproductive norms with pronatalist endowments exert strong influence on the fertility behavior of the Chinese in Canada. This influence effectively counteracts the negative effects of economic insecurity and encourages Chinese immigrants to quickly recover their fertility deficit after the initial immigration stage. The effects of the origin culture on fertility diminish with increasing exposure to the host society. However, even among the nativeborn or Canadian-born Chinese, the influence of Chinese reproductive norms is still present though not as strong as among the foreign-born Chinese.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.170

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Studies in PopulationSame topicDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFrench-language works237,207