Normative, Structural, and Individual Factors that Predispose Adult Children to Provide Social Support to Their Elderly Parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is based on a face-to-face survey, conducted in 2009, with a representative sample of adults who were aged 45 years or above, living in the urban area of Santiago, Chile. This survey examined the exchange network between adults and their elderly parents, focusing on two of the main explanatory approaches to supportive family interrelations. That is, the norms of filial obligation and reciprocity. The article also investigates factors associated with the structure of needs and opportunities, as well as the family structures of the adult children and their parents. By estimating logistic regression models with cluster-robust standard errors the reciprocity norm is found to be significant, whereas that for filial obligation is not. The estimated models show that receiving support from the parent is one of the main factors that predisposes the adult child to the provision of parental support. That is, such action is favored by incorporation in a network of reciprocal exchanges. Thus, intergenerational ties work in two directions: parents request help from their children but also give them help. The norm of filial obligation, on the other hand, is only significant in the case of women.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".