Intergenerational Assistance and Parental Marital Status in the US and Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The likelihood of assistance being exchanged between adult offspring (aged 27 to 44) and their parents is examined in the United States and Australia. Of particular concern is the role of parental marital status in exchanges ofassistance. Secondary analysis was conducted using data from the Australian Family Formation Project, Stage 2 (AFFP2) and the USA-based National Survey of Families and Households (NSFH). Questions were asked ofthe offspring, concerning the amount of financial, social/emotional, and instrumental help they give to or receive from their parents. The findings indicate that divorce has similar roles in intergenerational exchanges in Australia and in the USA, with offspring from divorced families reporting receiving less help from their parents than those from continuously married families. Offspring in both countries generally report exchanging less assistance with widowed fathers than continuously married parents. This highlights the importance ofwomen in keeping ties with the extended family. Australian offspring appear to be more likely than American offspring to give help (particularly instrumental help) to widowed mothers. This greater assistance from offspring, combined with greater support from the government, may indicate that widowed mothers in Australia are receiving greater assistance than similar mothers in the USA. Overall the similarities in these western post-industrial societies seem to outweigh the differences in divorce rates and government programs and result in largely similar patterns of intergenerational helping.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".