MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016138516 · doi:10.1300/j398v04n01_03

A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Gender Factors Contributing to Long-Term Marital Satisfaction

2005· article· en· W2016138516 on OpenAlexaffabout
Maria Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Couple & Relationship Therapy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCompromiseScale (ratio)Social psychologySociocultural evolutionCross-culturalSociologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article reports on the major findings of a cross-cultural study comparing long-term marital satisfaction between Caucasian couples and Chinese couples in Canada. The Dyadic Adjustment Scale was used to screen couples' marital satisfaction. In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted individually and jointly with the screened couples to explore their meanings and experiences of marital satisfaction. With the use of narrative analysis, the study illuminates how couples constructed their gender relationships to achieve marital satisfaction over a long course of thirty to thirty-six years according to their sociocultural contexts. The similarities and differences in how the two cultural groups' respondents constructed their long-term marital satisfaction are discussed in terms of: (1) household division of labour, (2) decision-making, (3) conflict and compromise, and (4) mutuality.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.388 · 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

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Couple & Relationship TherapySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207