MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947163792 · doi:10.1111/imig.12586

Determinants of Migrant Career Success: A Study of Recent Skilled Migrants in Australia

2019· article· en· W2947163792 on OpenAlexafffund
Diana Rajendran, Eddy S. Ng, Greg J. Sears, Nailah Ayub

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Migration · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityDalhousie University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSettlement (finance)CitizenshipMigrant workersInclusion (mineral)Neighbourhood (mathematics)Demographic economicsPopulationPerceptionPolitical scienceEconomic growthSociologyGender studiesPsychologyBusinessEconomicsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Australia has been aggressively pursuing skilled migrants to sustain its population and foster economic growth. However, many skilled migrants experience a downward career move upon migration to Australia. Based on a survey of recent skilled migrants, this study investigates how individual (age, years of settlement, qualifications), national/societal (citizenship and settlement), and organization‐level (climate of inclusion) factors influence their career success. Overall, we found that: (1) age at migration matters more than length of settlement in predicting skilled migrant career success; (2) citizenship uptake and living in a neighbourhood with a greater number of families from the same country of origin facilitate post‐migration career success; and (3) perceptions of one's social/informal networks in the workplace – a dimension of perceived organizational climate of inclusion – also have a positive impact on migrant career outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations75
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational MigrationSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207