Ethnic Differences in the Living Arrangements of Children in South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines ethnic variations in children’s living arrangements among black South Africans. Using data from the 1996 South African population and housing census and descriptive and multivariate analyses, I explore if there are differences in children’s residence patterns by ethnicity, identify the most common forms of household structure in which children live, and examine the role of various background factors in determining these living arrangements. Descriptive results show marked ethnic variations in the living arrangements of children, with more than 50 per cent of children living in extended households as opposed to living in a two-parent nuclear household or a single-parent nuclear household. Multinomial logistic regression results also show large differences in children’s living arrangements across groups, underscoring the salience of ethnicity. Other individual and household-level factors that have significant effects on children’s living arrangements include child’s gender and schooling status, the head of household’s level of schooling and gender, household size, standard of living and place of residence. For instance, children living in urban areas are more likely to live in extended households than those living in rural areas.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".