Kin Network and its Effect on the Psychological Well-being of the Youth: The Case of Taiwan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the course of fast economic development, a significant concomitant impact on the family system in Taiwan is the weakening of kinship relationships. Nevertheless, denser interactions among kin compared to western societies are still documented. Kin remains one of the major sources of social support in Taiwan. In the paper, we explore the effect of kin networks on the psychological well-being of adolescents based on survey data from the Taiwan Youth Project in 2001 and 2005. We first delineate the composition and boundary of kin networks and then analyze factors accounting for variation in intimate kin networks of adolescents, using the number of intimate kin as the indicator. The major findings are as follows. Intimate relationships between the youth and their grandparents imply a bilateral pattern. The kin network of the youths is limited mostly within the third degree relatives of their parental generation or the fourth degree relatives of their own generation, and reflect also a bilateral pattern but with a little more matrilineal inclination . Adolescents in the most disadvantaged families tend to have a smaller number of intimate kin. As expected, intimate relationships with parents and grandparents lead to larger numbers of intimate kin. In addition, the number of intimate kin significantly affect the psychological wellbeing of the youth; somewhat weak but independent of parental relationships (although it is a weak association, but has achieved independent statistical significance after control for the effect of parental relationships) . Although kin relations or kin networks remain prevalent in contemporary Taiwan, the relationships are more significant in early adolescence, and may decline along the course from adolescence to adulthood.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".