MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1951020196 · doi:10.25336/p6sc7k

Risk society and the second demographic transition

2002· article· en· W1951020196 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
David R. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Studies in Population · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsNipissing UniversityWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNipissing University
KeywordsDemographic transitionTransition (genetics)Demographic economicsSociologyEconomicsDevelopment economicsDemographyPopulationBiologyFertility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prominent “risk society” theorists such as Giddens and Beck have identified risk as a fundamental organizing principle of contemporary society. Importantly, a major cause of risk awareness and anxiety in modern society is individualism . . a concept Lesthaeghe linked to changes in family formation. In this regard, of the types of risk discussed in the sociological literature, “interpersonal risks” associated with cohabitation, marriage, and parenting are of obvious salience. This paper explores how the modern “risk society” thesis, and the concept of interpersonal risk could materially contribute to understanding the second demographic transition.

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)0.001
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 score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations11
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Studies in PopulationSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207