Culture and Co‐residence: An Exploration of Variation in Home‐Returning among Canadian Young Adults*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article s'inscrit dans la lignée des études sur les dimensions culturelles de la cohabitation entre générations en examinant de près le comportement des jeunes adultes canadiens qui retournent vivre chez leurs parents. Nous explorons les rapports mutuels entre la famille et la diversité culturelle, entre le capital financier et le capital social, et entre le rythme et les mécanismes de transitions précoces qui se manifestent au cours d'une vie. Les modéles de hasards proportionnels sont appliqués à un sous‐échantillon de 2 549 jeunes adultes, àgés de 19 á 34 ans, en tenant compte des données de l'Enquete sociale générale, cycle 10, de 1995. L'une des principales conclusions tirées ici indique que les jeunes qui sont de langue maternelle anglaise sont beaucoup plus susceptibles de retourner chez leurs parents après un premier départ que ceux dont la langue maternelle est le français ou une autre langue. Les autres variables qui entrent en jeu sont le niveau d'education du père, le nombre de frères et de soeurs, le sexe, l'âge au moment du depart de la maison et la raison de ce départ. L'article aborde aussi les questions des responsabilités et des rôles des parents autour de la cinquantaine, et de la socialisation au sein de la famille au cours de la vie. This article offers a focussed examination of variation in home‐returning behaviour among Canadian young adults. Framed within the life course perspective, we explore the interrelationships among family and cultural diversity, financial and social capital, and the timing and pathways of early transitions. Proportional hazards analyses are performed on a subsample of 2,549 young adults aged 19–34, using data from the 1995 General Social Survey, Cycle 10. A major finding is that those whose mother tongue is English are significantly more likely to return to the parental home than those with French or “other” mother tongues. Other variables include: father's education, number of siblings, gender, age at home‐leaving, and initial reason for home‐leaving. Implications for midlife parental roles and responsibilities, and for family socialization are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".