Are Urban Youth More Modern? Spatially Based Differentiation, Home Leaving, and Transition Outcomes in Gatineau, Rouyn-Noranda, and Saguenay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on an interesting question for studies of youth and regional development: How are the transitions and social integration of young people shaped by the localities and spaces they are brought up in and through which they pass on their way to adulthood? Using social differentiation theory, our study focuses on how the socioeconomic and historic structuring of regions and individual mobility may leave imprints on the life course of young adults. We examine this issue from the angle of the transitions to adulthood of migrant and nonmigrant youth who live in the cities of two region types: metropolitan or urban fringe environments and resource- and agriculture-dependent regions. The analysis is based on survey data collected from young adults aged 20 to 29 years (N = 1,202) living in Gatineau, Rouyn-Noranda, and Saguenay in the Province of Quebec. Results show not only that metropolitan youth are not more “modern” than their regional counterparts but also that youth mobility has effects on the locales under study.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".