Intergenerational solidarity in Asian immigrant families : subtitle the experience of employed Canadians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main purpose of this study was to examine the Asian perspective in regard to the intergenerational solidarity framework developed by Bengtson and his colleagues. Focusing on normative solidarity and functional solidarity within Asian families, adult children's provision of assistance to elderly relatives was investigated in relation to norms of filial responsibility. A subsample of 109 employed Asian immigrants in Canada was selected from a national survey of Work and Family conducted by CARNET (The Canadian Aging Research Network). The study tested three hypotheses: 1) stronger norms of filial responsibility (normative solidarity) are positively associated with higher levels and more hours of assistance provided to elderly relatives (functional solidarity); 2) older age at immigration and/or shorter length of residence (immigrant status) are positively associated with higher levels and more hours of assistance provided to elderly relatives (functional solidarity); and 3) there is an interaction effect of norms of filial responsibility and immigrant status on levels and hours of assistance provided to elderly relatives. The results showed that there was no relationship between norms of filial responsibility and the provision of assistance to elderly relatives; nor was there a relationship between immigrant status and the provision of assistance to elderly relatives. Coresidence with the elderly relative, as an alternative measure of norms of filial responsibility in Asian families, was investigated with regard to the provision of assistance to the elderly relative in the post hoc analysis. The results showed that there was a significant relationship between coresidence and higher levels and more hours of assistance provided to elderly relatives.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 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".