MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913706614 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.49.2.141

Youth and Family in Southeast Europe: Patterns of Individualization Along with the Lines of Human Development

2018· article· en· W2913706614 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miran Lavrič, Sergej Flere, Tina Cupar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Education and Societal Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernization theoryFamily lifeHuman Development IndexSociologyGender studiesHuman development (humanity)Social psychologyPsychologyEconomic growthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The individualization of family life is one of the crucial ideas among leading theorists dealing with late modernity (Giddens, 1991; Beck, 1992; Bauman, 2000; Beck-Gemsheim, 2002). The individualization thesis was applied in a study of youth attitudes and actions relating to individualization in family life. Data were gathered through surveys on representative samples of young people from nine countries in Southeast Europe. The Human Development Index (HDI) was used as an indicator of the general level of modernization. Analyses revealed that young people from countries with higher HDI tend to (1) be substantially more autonomous in their decision-making and in their plans for the future; (2) perceive relationships with their parents as more conflictual; (3) perceive decision-making in their family as less patriarchal; and (4) be substantially less inclined to marry. With the notable exception of Slovenia, there is also a strong tendency for youth from more developed countries to leave their parents’ households earlier. With some important reservations, these findings lend important empirical support to the individualization thesis relating to family life.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicYouth Education and Societal DynamicsFrench-language works237,207