Changes in Income within a Cohort over the Later Life Course: Evidence for Income Status Convergence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper examines the extent to which an individual's income-status position relative to that of others in the same cohort is maintained over the later life course. Changes in the income status of individuals born between 1924 and 1928 are estimated by means of synthetic cohort methods. Using a series of cross-sectional data files from every fifth Survey of Consumer Finances, starting in 1978, the findings show that, from ages 50 to 64, persons of this birth cohort with early-life socio-economic status advantages (namely high education) improve their absolute and relative income status position vis-à-vis others with status disadvantages. For ages 65 to 74, the economic well-being of individuals with status advantages and disadvantages converge. Since Canada's public pension programs are relatively well developed in terms of comprehensiveness and generosity, they do a good job at countering the effects of status background characteristics on the distribution of income in old age. In the absence of these programs (i.e., up to age 64), the relative position of those with high education and other advantaged groups is strengthened.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".