Family Influences on Goals, Remittance Use, and Settlement of Mexican Immigrant Agricultural Workers in Minnesota
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International migration to seek work and remit money home is an increasingly common family strategy to overcome financial hardship. However, little is understood about family involvement in the decision to leave or how family circumstances influence migration. This qualitative study analyzed narratives of 17 agricultural workers in Minnesota and 17 of their family members in Mexico to describe their migration experiences. Results show how goals, remittances, and families shape or are shaped by the migration experience. We identified three family situations that influenced immigrants’ goals, remittance use, and their length of stay. “Target earners” (n=5) left their spouses and children in Mexico. They earned money in Minnesota and remitted as much as possible to improve their lives in Mexico. “Settlers” (n=10) lived with spouses and children in Minnesota. Their earnings were spent primarily on basic living expenses; little was left to remit more than occasionally or invest in longer-term goals. Over time, U.S. settlement emerged as a goal for this group of immigrants. “Singles” (n=2) who were not married, primarily supported parents in Mexico. They were unsure of their future goals. The decision by families to use international migration to achieve goals and improve their lives results in economic activities and social relationships that span two countries. As globalization increases this phenomenon, it is important to expand our understanding of the realities of these complex family systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".