MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002546736 · doi:10.1080/13676261.2020.1716964

Seeking stability: a preliminary exploration of Canadian young adults’ financial goals

2020· article· en· W3002546736 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sarah Knudson, Kathrina Mazurik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Youth Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Education and Societal Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProsperitySocioeconomic statusContext (archaeology)Financial independenceFinanceDemographic economicsSociologyPsychologyEconomicsEconomic growthDemographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Young people’s financial lives have undergone change, with delays and struggles attaining stable employment, home ownership, and financial independence. Despite such change, research on the future thinking of young adults suggests the persistent significance of such financial milestones. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 36 young adults aged 18–32 in a mid-sized, prosperous Canadian city, inquiring into their goals and perceptions of their future financial lives in light of their current situations. Findings revealed young adults’ overarching desire for financial security, notably through goals of a steady job, debt reduction, and home ownership. These findings affirm that during this transitional time of life, many young adults are involved in a search for security, hoping to attain financial independence and stability in a conventionally linear and upward fashion. This search for security and stability manifests differently across sociodemographic positions (namely age, gender, birthplace, and socioeconomic status), reflecting differing experiences of precarity, cultural representations of the life course, and positions along financial trajectories. Participants’ visions of their financial futures also appear to connect to factors in the local context, including its relative prosperity, persistence of traditional gender roles, and a relatively modest cost of living compared to other urban centres in Canada.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Youth StudiesSame topicYouth Education and Societal DynamicsFrench-language works237,207