Adolescents’ Obligations toward their Families: Intergenerational Discrepancies and Well-being in Three Ethnic Groups in the Netherlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parents and their adolescent children tend to disagree about children’s responsibilities in the family, particularly when it comes to caring for parents and household chores. We explored whether this disagreement is similar in three ethnic groups or whether it depends on ethnic background and acculturation. More particularly we investigated: (a) how adolescents and parents perceive family obligations and to what extent their perceptions differ, (b) to what extent family obligations are shaped by ethnic background and acculturation experiences, and (c) to what extent intergenerational discrepancies in family obligations are linked to adolescents’ well-being (i.e., self-esteem, life satisfaction, psychological problems, and behavioral problems). Seventy-four Surinamese, 115 Turkish, and 92 national adolescent-parent dyads living in the Netherlands completed a survey on adolescents’ family obligations. Across ethnic groups, parents reported more family obligations than their children. Turkish and Surinamese families reported more family obligations than did national families. Secondly, intergenerational discrepancies in family obligations were related to ethnicity and acculturation. Finally, larger intergenerational discrepancies coincided with lower life satisfaction and more behavioral problems. In short, intergenerational discrepancies in family obligations may be a common phenomenon, but this phenomenon also depends on families’ ethnic background and acculturation experiences.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".