MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2508043940

The Intergenerational Transmission of Family Values: A Comparison between Teenagers and Parents in Taiwan

2004· article· en· W2508043940 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chin-Chun Yi, Chin‐fen Chang, Ying-Hwa Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObediencePopularityHarmony (color)Social psychologySocializationSocial classPsychologyCultural valuesSociologyInterpersonal communicationHonorCultural transmission in animalsFamily valuesInterpersonal relationshipDevelopmental psychologyGender studiesPolitical scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inspired by Melvin Kohn and his colleagues, data gathered from various countries over the last three decades have shown that class structure is a significant aspect in understanding how parents socialize their children. Middle-class parents have consistently demonstrated different child-rearing patterns in contrast with their working-class counterpart. Parent's occupation, with the concomitant contextual requirement, is thus argued to impose preferential values with regard to child-rearing practice. The conclusion appears to be universally valid and becomes a consensus. This study argues that besides the manifest effect of parent's occupation, the social norms imbedded may serve a more powerful explanation and should be taken into account. It is long been recognized that cultural practice (including family socialization) is constrained by common social values which are diverse and sometimes opposite among different societies. Specifically, filial piety, interpersonal harmony, honor and trust, etc. are deep-rooted Asian values, and are not necessarily equivalent to Western values of obedience and popularity. It will be interesting to explore possible effects on the intergenerational transmission of family values between cultural norms and personal resources.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207