Intergenerational Support between Older Adults and Adult Children in Nigeria: The Role of Reciprocity
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid change in the family support structure in developing countries could jeopardize the concept of reciprocal support an older adult receives in later life. This study explored the perception of reciprocity between older parents and adult children on intergenerational support in Northern Nigeria. We purposely selected 18 participants and conducted face-to-face interviews. We analyzed the data using descriptive phenomenological method analysis. Three major themes emerged: characteristics of support, perceived support given and received to/from children, and perceived indebtedness/credit. Financial support is one of the most common types of support received by older adults. The perceived support given to adult children was expressed as "huge and sacrificial" by older adults. The adult children felt they are providing less support than they have received from their parents and expressed the feeling of indebtedness to their older parents. Generally, adult children perceived the need to reciprocate past support received from their older parents. The perception of reciprocity remains strong among Nigerians and plays a vital role in promoting intergenerational support between older parents and adult children. We discuss the implications of the findings, including the role of professionals to promote provision of other forms of support to older adults.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it