MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974981887 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.50.2.002

Gender and Parenting Difficulty of the First-Born: Implications for Parity Progression among Japanese Couples

2019· article· en· W2974981887 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kana Fuse

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)FertilityPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyDaughterParity (physics)DemographyPopulationPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores possible implications of gender and parenting difficulty of the first-born child on parity progression among parents in Japan, a country with widespread daughter preference. Past research reveals that having a child of the less preferred gender is associated with a higher probability of a subsequent birth and a shorter birth interval if couples choose to have an additional child. Therefore, having a child of the less preferred gender (boy) may be associated with a higher probability of another birth and a shorter birth interval in Japan. But difficult parenting experience with the first-born is also known to affect fertility negatively. Boys are considered more difficult to raise than girls as they are more prone to illness and injuries, physically active, and require parental attention. Hence, parents of first-born sons may rather hesitate or postpone having another child. Using the Longitudinal Survey of Newborns in the 21 st Century, a nationally representative longitudinal survey of children born in 2001 in Japan, this study explores these explanations. Results from discrete-time event history analysis to examine transition to a second birth among parents of first-born children surveyed reveal that gender of the first-born did not affect parity progression. Regardless of the gender, parents with difficult first-borns were less likely to have another child. Findings highlight the importance of continued policy efforts aimed at addressing parenting concerns and burden.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFrench-language works237,207