MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889311470 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.49.2.231

White and Latino Remarriage Differences in the United States: A case for Moving Beyond the Catholic Assumption

2018· article· en· W2889311470 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Catherine B. McNamee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemarriageNational Longitudinal SurveysEthnic groupDemographyDemographic economicsNational Survey of Family GrowthWhite (mutation)AttendancePsychologySocial psychologyGender studiesSociologyPopulationPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the United States, Latinos and non-Hispanic Whites have similar first marriage and divorce rates, but Latinos remarry at lower rates than Whites. Although Latinos are disproportionately more Catholic than Whites, and Latinos remarry less than Whites, assuming that religion is driving the remarriage difference could be a religious congruence fallacy, which occurs when religion is assumed to be the driving influence behind a behavior actually shaped by other forces. The present study utilizes the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 and discrete-time event history analysis to examine the influence of religious affliation and attendance on ethnic remarriage differences. The findings suggest that Catholicism does not account for the lower rates of remarriage of Latinos compared to Whites and provide strong evidence for dispelling the previously untested on ethnic differences in remarriage. Additionally, Evangelical Protestants, Particularly men, appear the most likely to remarry.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.217 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207