MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2601504976 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.35.3.393

How Parents Influence the Life Plans of Graduating Chinese University Students

2004· article· en· W2601504976 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francine M. Deutsch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaFilial pietyPsychologySocial psychologyDemographySociologyPolitical scienceGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Between November and March of their senior year, eighty-four male and female graduating students at a Chinese University were interviewed about their proposed post-graduate plans and their parents’ reactions to them. In May or June of the same year, they reported on the choices they had actually made and their parents’ influence on those choices. Students pursued jobs, further study in China, or study in foreign countries. A majority of jobseekers had conflicts with parents, either over the type of job they sought or its distance from home. Ultimately, more than half of the students whose preferences differed from their parents acquiesced to their parents’ wishes. As compared to students with siblings, however, only children were more likely to resist and follow their own inclinations. The results were discussed both in terms of the persistence of norms of filial piety and familism among educated youth, and the increasing divergence of the life course in a rapidly modernizing, industrializing, and urbanizing China.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations29
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207