Of the Family Tree: Congruence on Filial Obligation between Older Parents and Adult Children in Japanese Canadian Families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing on the intergenerational stake hypothesis (Bengtson and Kuypers, 1971), this article explores intergenerational congruence and incongruence on filial obligation, and implications for social support, between older nisei (second generation) parents and adult sansei (third generation) children in Japanese Canadian families. Using data from semi-structured interviews with 100 parent-child dyads in British Columbia, congruence on close-ended responses to value statements (degree congruence) and the content congruence of open-ended responses are examined. The findings show the majority of parent-child dyads indicate overall (both degree and content) congruence in filial obligation, especially when a parent is female, widowed, and/or has poor/fair health status. We conclude that despite markedly different historical life course experiences and acculturation processes, both generations continue to regard filial obligation as important. These findings are discussed with respect to implications for social support exchanges given a continued valuation of filial obligation in Asian post-immigrant (North American-born) and immigrant families.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".