MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079261966 · doi:10.1177/0898264310374507

Residential Relocation of Amenity Migrants to Florida: “Unpacking” Post-amenity Moves

2010· article· en· W2079261966 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging and Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNational Institute of Nursing ResearchU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsAmenityTypologyRelocationContext (archaeology)Dependency (UML)UnpackingGeographySociologyDemographic economicsBusinessEconomicsEngineeringComputer scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to unpack characteristics of interstate and intrastate moves undertaken by elderly amenity migrants. The authors examined these moves in the context of Litwak and Longino's life-course typology of migration. METHOD: In an 11-year longitudinal study, the authors examined the first move made by respondents out of a large Florida retirement community where no services were offered. Data from premove and postmove in-person interviews were used. RESULTS: This article found five distinct post-amenity move types, reflecting different degrees of dependency: (a) serial amenity moves, (b) positioning moves, (c) informal assistance moves, (d) formal assistance moves, and (e) dependency moves. DISCUSSION: Findings of this study not only support Litwak and Longino's migration typology but also elaborate and extend it. Only some older adults (20.4%) make counterstream assistance moves. Additional move types reflect new options for late-life migration to enhance person- environment fit.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.335 · 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