MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2187347195 · doi:10.1002/jtr.2079

On the Global Determinants of Visiting Home

2016· article· en· W2187347195 on OpenAlexaff
Faruk Balli, Syed Abul Basher, Rosmy Jean Louis, Ahmed Saber Mahmud

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Tourism Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsVancouver Island University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmigrationTRIPS architectureEstimationDemographic economicsPanel dataWork (physics)WageEconomicsGeographyEconometricsLabour economicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we examine possible macro-level determinants underlying the number of trips emigrants make back home by exploiting a panel of data comprising 25 countries over the period 1995–2010. To guide the empirical work, we first construct a simple model of the decision by emigrants to visit their home country. The model predicts, among other things, that the effects of distance on the frequency of visiting home are negative but the impact of the host country's wage on the decision to visit home is ambiguous: It depends on the legal status of the emigrants in the host country. Our empirical results based on a pooled estimator support these predictions. First, the number of trips back home is inversely related to distance but positively related to income and institutional quality. Second, emigrants living in Africa and North America are less likely to visit home, whereas emigrants living in the Arabian Gulf countries visit home more often. The results from cross-sectional estimations provide very similar results, indicating that our results are robust to alternative estimation approaches. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.392 · 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Tourism ResearchSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207