The Changes in Mainland Chinese Families During the Social Transition: A Critical Analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
China has seen a rapid urbanization and industrialization, and a dramatic improvement in the quality of life and living conditions since its economic reform started in 1980s. The changes in the social and economic context, and implementation of One Child Family Policy led to noticeable changes in family structure and relationship. While traditional extended families exist, there occur multiple forms of Chinese families, i.e. nuclear families, single-parent families, DINK families, the single person household and the cohabitant household. Some scholars view the changes as the deterioration of marriage and family values and growing emphasis on individualism. The current paper critically analyzes the major studies of Chinese families to understand the changes in family relationship, structure and values over the past 30 years. Three questions are asked: Has Chinese family become nuclear in structure and diverse in form? Have Chinese shifted their values from collective interests to individual interests? Has Chinese marriage become less important? The extended family is the dominant functional family form in which children and elderly are taken care of while nuclear family is the most common form. Single-person family, singleparent family, remarried family and childless family are a fraction of the population. Families continue to prioritize collective interest over individual interest. Overall Chinese value marriage. The first marriage is postponed. Premarital sex is less stigmatized, but cohabitation remains marginalized. Contemporary family is fluid and dynamic.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it