MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118230660 · doi:10.1177/002214650404500202

Role Sequencing: Does Order Matter for Mental Health?

2004· article· en· W2118230660 on OpenAlexaff
Pamela Jackson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health and Social Behavior · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsNormativeLife course approachPsychologyMental healthBaby boomNational Longitudinal SurveysDevelopmental psychologyCohortEthnic groupNational Child Development StudyGerontologySocial psychologyDemographyMedicineSocioeconomic statusPsychiatrySociologyDemographic economicsPopulationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Role sequencing refers to the ordering of social roles. According to the normative order hypothesis, adults who follow a certain sequencing of their social roles will be better adjusted than their peers who follow other life course patterns. The normative order is defined as first entering the paid labor force, getting married, and later having children. This study tests this hypothesis by analyzing retrospective life history data from three subsamples of adults who completed the 1987--1988 National Survey of Families and Households: (1) married, working parents; (2) divorced, working parents; and (3) married, unemployed parents. The findings indicate significant race/ethnic (black/white), gender, and cohort differences in the type of role sequencing patterns that are conducive to positive mental health. For example, African Americans who work first, then have children, and later get married report better mental health than their peers who followed the normative order White men and women seem to benefit from following the normative course of role transitions. Among women, however, the psychological benefits of following typical life course patterns are especially evident among those born during the baby boom.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations39
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health and Social BehaviorSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207