MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2268645508 · doi:10.1093/esr/jcv077

Social Mobility and Class Identity: The Role of Economic Conditions in 33 Societies, 1999–2009

2015· article· en· W2268645508 on OpenAlexaff
Josh Curtis

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Sociological Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mobilitySociologyClass (philosophy)Identity (music)Social classSocial identity theoryEconomic geographyEconomic systemDemographic economicsEconomicsSocial scienceEpistemologySocial groupMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using hierarchal linear models fitted to survey data from the 1999 and 2009 International Social Survey Program Social Inequality module, this article examines how social mobility shapes class identification in 33 societies. My concern is with how social mobility—both at the individual level and the country level—affects class identification. The findings demonstrate that both one’s own social class and their class origin influence class identification. On the other hand, national-level absolute mobility does not meaningfully shape class identification. This finding implies that people either consider only their own economic conditions—i.e. they care little about the conditions in which others live—or they are unaware of actual levels of mobility within their country. Finally, I build on previous research by demonstrating the importance of national-level income inequality. As income inequality rises, middle-class identities become weaker—regardless of one’s social class position—because the adverse effects of inequality are felt more acutely across the class structure.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations68
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Sociological ReviewSame topicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality StudiesFrench-language works237,207