MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131594660 · doi:10.1080/00324728.2014.995695

Explaining religious differentials in family-size preference: Evidence from Nepal in 1996

2015· article· en· W2131594660 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

VenuePopulation Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsReligiosityEthnic groupPreferenceFertilitySocial psychologyPsychologyReligious identityVariance (accounting)Identity (music)DemographySociologyPopulationMathematicsStatisticsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine how religio-ethnic identity, individual religiosity, and family members' religiosity were related to preferred family size in Nepal in 1996. Analyses of survey data from the Chitwan Valley Family Study show that socio-economic characteristics and individual experiences can suppress, as well as largely account for, religio-ethnic differences in fertility preference. These religio-ethnic differentials are associated with variance in particularized theologies or general value orientations (like son preference) across groups. In addition, individual and family religiosity are both positively associated with preferred family size, seemingly because of their association with religious beliefs—beliefs that are likely to shape fertility strategies. These findings suggest the need for improvements in how we conceptualize and measure supra-individual religious influence in a variety of settings and for a range of demographically interesting outcomes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.368
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.055 · 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