MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972495222 · doi:10.1111/aswp.12042

Rural‐to‐Urban Migration, Family Resilience, and Policy Framework for Social Support in China

2015· article· en· W1972495222 on OpenAlexaff
Ya Wen, Jill Hanley

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Work and Policy Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaSocial supportSocial policyPsychological resilienceEconomic growthCoping (psychology)SociologyFamily resilienceUnit (ring theory)Political scienceDevelopment economicsPsychologySocial psychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

China's internal rural‐to‐urban migration has impacted the country in economic, social, and cultural terms. Despite the increasing number of families involved in migration, little is known about how migrant families as a unit adapt to new environments from rural to urban settings. Policy making needs to be informed to address migrant families' needs. This article investigates how Chinese families experience transitions resulting from migration, exploring their use of formal and informal support to achieve adaptation and the process of making evolving choices for their children. We begin with a brief introduction to the literature on family resilience and its relation to Chinese migrant families. Then we provided an analysis of Chinese social policies most central to the experiences of rural‐to‐urban migrant families. After a brief description of methodology, we present our findings starting with a migrant family story to provide an anchor for the following discussion on how current policies can impede or facilitate migrant families' resilience. Our conclusion is that lack of social support leaves migrant Chinese families vulnerable when coping with enormous social, cultural, and economic transformations. Family constitutes the basis of Chinese society; therefore, a policy framework on social support is important to support these families and foster family resilience.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations53
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social Work and Policy ReviewSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207