MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976855131 · doi:10.1177/0192513x19879189

Parents’ Expectations of Familial Elder Care under the Neoliberal Hong Kong Society

2019· article· en· W2976855131 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

VenueJournal of Family Issues · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersGeneral Research Fund of Shanghai Normal University
KeywordsCollectivismIndividualismCommodificationModernization theorySociologyElder careWelfareGender studiesPsychologyEconomic growthPolitical scienceGerontologyMedicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies have examined the shifts in traditional familial values among Chinese populations. It was argued that the values have diminished or eroded due to Westernization and modernization. Instead of the collectivist-individualist divide, this study aims to understand the role of neoliberal discourse in Hong Kong Chinese parents’ beliefs in familial values and elder care. Using data from 120 in-depth individual interviews with parents of different generations, this study found four themes: (1) the notion of self-reliance; (2) the intertwinement of neoliberal ideas and filial values; (3) redefinition of filial behaviors; and (4) commodification of care. Results suggest that the changes in parents’ filial beliefs have shifted senior care responsibilities from families to individuals and the private market. It creates a disjuncture between care arrangement and governmental welfare; more comprehensive pension and senior care services are thus needed to respond to societal changes.

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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.297 · 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