MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946554015 · doi:10.1177/0731121419849100

Economic Insecurity among Gay and Bisexual Men: Evidence from the 1991–2016 U.S. General Social Survey

2019· article· en· W2946554015 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociological Perspectives · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsDemographic economicsSurvey data collectionGeneral Social SurveyAmerican Community SurveyPsychologyDemographySociologySocial psychologyEconomicsPopulationCensusFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although a sizeable body of research has examined the labor market outcomes for sexual minority men, suggesting that gay and bisexual men earn less than their heterosexual counterparts, fewer studies have addressed whether any apparent earnings disadvantages for sexual minority men extend to economic insecurity more broadly. Using 1991–2016 U.S. General Social Survey (GSS) data, we examine three measures of economic insecurity—household income, perceived financial satisfaction, and views about family income—among gay and bisexual men. We find that most sexual minority men experience multiple types of economic insecurity with larger disparities present for bisexual men. Consistent with the labor market literature, we observe that family structure and human capital acquisition primarily accounted for economic insecurity disparities for gay men, and family structure partially explained disparities for bisexual men.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.294 · 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