Are the Parents All Right? Parental Stress, Ethnic Culture and Intergenerational Relations in Aging Families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rapid population aging and high rates of immigration from non-Western countries are contributing to an increasingly diverse ethnic mosaic of North American family life. Drawing upon a life course theoretical perspective synthesized with a sociocultural stress and coping model, this study examines stress among parents aged 50+ with at least one adult child aged 19–35. Data are drawn from a mixed-methods study conducted in Metro Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Interviews were conducted with 588 parents in 2015/16, and a smaller sub-set of face-to-face in-depth follow-up interviews (n = 32). Respondents self-identified with one of four ethnocultural groups: British-, Chinese-, Persian/Iranian- or South Asian-Canadian. Hierarchical OLS regression, in addition to qualitative thematic analysis was used to analyze the data set. Higher parental stress was found among: Persians/Iranians, and Chinese parents (compared to British); those with greater intergenerational conflict; those with unemployed children; lower education of parents; fewer years lived in Canada; and those with lower income satisfaction. An interaction effect for Persian men compared to British females was also revealed. Overall, the findings demonstrate the salience of cultural dimensions, intergenerational relationship dynamics, and economic factors in furthering our understanding of parental stress in ethnically diverse aging families.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".