MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589140785 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.43.5.731

Understanding High Levels of Singlehood in Singapore

2012· article· en· W2589140785 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gavin W. Jones, Pamela Chia Pei Zhi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in Asia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohabitationPopulationSocial policyIndividualismSociologyGovernment (linguistics)Demographic economicsEconomic growthEconomicsPolitical scienceDemographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trend towards late marriage and nonmarriage has characterized East and Southeast Asia over the past three decades. Singlehood levels in Singapore are high, particularly among the Chinese population. Based on a recent qualitative study on 30 single Singaporeans of Chinese descent, the paper examines a number of factors relevant to the high level of singlehood among Chinese population in Singapore. The high financial and opportunity costs of marrying and raising a family are shown to be relevant, as well as increasing individualism and changing attitudes about marriage. The paper argues that the trend towards marriage postponement and non-marriage in Singapore is related to increasing emphasis on freedom, independence and self-actualization, greater individual decision making about marriage, the increasing social acceptability of premarital sex and cohabitation and changing attitudes about the desirability of marriage. Some findings from our Singapore case seem to echo the second demographic transition as reported in many Western societies. These findings may have implications for the Singapore government’s population and social policy in terms of shaping positive attitudes towards marriage and procreation and building effective matchmaking institutions.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.613
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations56
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicSocioeconomic Development in AsiaFrench-language works237,207