Same-sex marriage in Canada: The impact of legal marriage on the first cohort of gay and lesbian Canadians to wed.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A ruling of the Court of Appeal for Ontario on June 10, 2003, declared the federal definition of marriage unconstitutional and thus opened the door for gay and lesbian couples to legally marry in Ontario. Other provinces followed suit until the federal Civil Marriage Act on July 20, 2005, made same-sex marriage legal nationwide. Research on the relationships of gay and lesbian couples that had previously been limited to cohabiting, unmarried couples could now examine the impact of legalized marriage on same-sex couples. The present study addressed this topic in a quantitative assessment of relationship satisfaction and attachment in 26 married lesbian or gay couples and also in a qualitative thematic analysis of interviews with 15 of these couples to determine the impact of legalized marriage on their relationships and to explore their views about the support they received from society and their communities. All couples interviewed indicated that being able to marry had affected them in various ways relationally, political and socially. The quantitative analysis showed that the 26 couples had significantly higher levels of relationship satisfaction and significantly less attachment-related anxiety and avoidance compared to normative data for married heterosexual couples. Despite some challenges and struggles, the participants indicated that marriage had an overwhelmingly positive effect on their lives.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".