Sibling Similarities and the Importance of Parental Socioeconomic Position in Electoral Participation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We studied the impact of an individual’s family and community background on their voting propensity in the 2015 Finnish parliamentary elections by employing a sibling design on an individual-level register-based dataset. The results showed that a quarter of the total variance in voter turnout was shared between siblings. Considering the dichotomous nature of the turnout variable, this implies that background has a strong effect which is almost comparable to sibling similarity in education. Parental socioeconomic position and voting, in turn, are equally important factors by explaining one-third of this shared part of the likelihood of voting. Mothers and fathers make roughly equal contributions. The results suggest that future studies of inter-generational effects in political participation, whenever possible, should use information from both maternal and paternal characteristics and multiple indicators of parental socioeconomic position simultaneously. We conclude by underlining that as people cannot choose their background, voting propensity is strongly influenced by factors beyond an individual’s own control, which is problematic for the functioning of inclusive democracy and equality of opportunity.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it