MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022394686 · doi:10.1353/ces.2013.0006

What do Sponsored Parents and Grandparents Contribute?

2013· article· en· W2022394686 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian ethnic studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrandparentImmigrationDemographic economicsHuman capitalSocioeconomic statusSociologyImmigration policyEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsDemographyPopulationLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada increasingly favours immigration policies based on human capital theory and economic outcomes. Consequently, while immigration is on the increase there is a downward trend in the number of “family class” entrants admitted to the country. The group most seriously affected is sponsored parents and/or grandparents who are also the most vulnerable to criticisms against family class immigration. The discussion is centered on the perceived lack of potential economic contributions of these immigrants. Such a focus, however, overlooks the feminized nature of this type of immigration and the many non-economic contributions these immigrants make. Using multinomial regression modeling of the Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Canada data, we examine economic and non-economic contributions of sponsored parent and/or grandparent immigrants and compare them to immigrants of similar age migrating under other categories of immigration. We find that sponsored parents and/or grandparents make significant economic contributions to Canadian society as well as other non-economic ones that are often overlooked. We also find that their contributions increase over time and are heavily gendered, with female sponsored parents and/or grandparents making more non-economic contributions than their male counterparts or other immigrants of similar age migrating under other categories of immigration. Le Canada favorise de plus en plus les politiques d’immigration qui sont fondées sur la théorie du capital humain et sur ses retombées économiques. Par conséquent, alors que cette immigration est à la hausse, il y a néanmoins une tendance à la baisse du nombre d’entrées obtenues à partir du «regroupement familial». Le groupe le plus sérieusement touché est celui des parents et / ou grands-parents parrainés, qui sont aussi les plus vulnérables face aux critiques contre cette catégorie. La discussion est centrée sur le manque perçu de contributions économiques potentielles qu’ils peuvent apporter. Une telle approche, cependant, néglige la nature féminisée de ce type d’immigration et leurs nombreuses prestations non monétaires. En utilisant un modèle de régression multinominale de l’Enquête longitudinale auprès des immigrants au Canada, nous examinons ces apports et nous les comparons à ceux d’autres immigrés d’un âge similaire et provenant d’autres catégories. Nous constatons que les parents et / ou grands-parents parrainés font d’importantes contributions économiques à la société canadienne, ainsi que des non-économiques qui sont souvent négligées. Nous constatons également qu’au fil du temps leurs prestations augmentent et sont fortement sexuées, les femmes en faisant plus au niveau non monétaire que leurs homologues masculins et que les immigrés d’un âge similaire venus par l’entremise d’autres catégories d’immigration.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.367
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