Foster Children’s Educational Outcomes when Child Fostering is Motivated by Norms: The Case of Cameroon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates a new determinant of fostering a child and evaluate whether children who are fostered in due to this reason have different schooling outcomes than children who are fostered in for other reasons. The study tests whether households headed by a male who is the eldest of his brothers have a higher probability of hosting a foster child once the variables such as education, wealth and labor needs are controlled. Such a relationship is expected in patrilineal societies if social norms dictate that this is the duty of the kin group’s head—the eldest brother—to host a child fostered out following a shock and when no other household can take care of him. This hypothesis is tested in the context of Cameroon where many ethnic groups are patrilineal. The author notes that households headed by a male who is the eldest of his brothers have a higher probability of hosting school-age foster girls but not foster boys. This could be either because girls are more likely than boys to be fostered out in the country following an economic or a demographic shock or because they have more difficulties than boys to find a host household. However, no evidence suggesting that girls fostered in due to norms receive less education than girls fostered in for other reasons is found.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".