MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2603747311 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.34.4.497

Mate Selection and Female Age at Marriage: A Micro Level Investigation in Tamil Nadu, India

2003· article· en· W2603747311 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. Sheela, N. Audinarayana

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDowryTamilCasteDemographyMenarcheGeographyRural areaSocioeconomicsOld Age SecurityExogamyMate choiceSociologyFertilityPopulationBirth ratePolitical scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to examine the process of mate selection in determining the age at marriage of 600 ever-married women drawn from rural (300) and urban (300) areas of Salem district, Tamil Nadu. Results based on the Multiple Classification Analysis show that both in rural and urban areas, time taken to initiate marriage process after menarche, caste background, age difference between bride and bridegroom and consultation of women for their marriage have played a greater role in determining their age at marriage in that order. Further, in urban areas, consanguinity has exhibited a highly significant effect on their age at marriage. While the role of payment of dowry has some effect on age at marriage of women both in rural and urban areas, the practice of horoscope matching has such an effect only in rural areas. Contrary to the expectation, first-born daughters enter into matrimony comparatively at higher ages than their later-bom counterparts only in rural areas. A weak support to residential propinquity theory of mate selection is also noticed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.147 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations27
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFrench-language works237,207