MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150428552 · doi:10.1093/geronb/61.1.s4

The Changing Meaning of Family Support Among Older Chinese and Korean Immigrants

2006· article· en· W2150428552 on OpenAlexaff
S T Wong, Grace J. Yoo, Anita L. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series B · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsImmigrationMeaning (existential)Social supportFamily supportChinese familyPsychologySociologySocial psychologyGeographyMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Our objective in this study was to examine how family social-support expectations have changed among older Chinese and Korean U.S. immigrants. METHODS: Fifty-two Cantonese- and Korean-speaking immigrants older than 60 years participated in eight focus groups. Transcripts were translated into English. Themes were developed based on a coding structure and compared to past research. RESULT: Participants discussed changed perspectives of family social support and the need to integrate both American and Chinese or Korean culture, thus becoming bicultural. Three distinct perspectives of family emerged: (1) participants felt they had become peripheral family members, (2) parents were no longer authority figures in families, and (3) participants were more independent. Finally, participants described how factors such as a changed economic environment, living alone, and extending their social network beyond family, promoted a move to biculturalism. DISCUSSION: These results suggest that the integration of two cultures, or biculturalism, is an indicator of successful adaptation to immigration later in life; older Chinese and Korean immigrants are adjusting to living in the United States and blending multiple cultures simultaneously. Thus, acculturation frameworks implying a linear process may not be theoretically valid as ethnic identity, particularly for those who immigrate to different countries, changes over the life course.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations133
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series BSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207