Concentration and dispersion: school-to-work linkages and their impact on occupational assortative mating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More people now are delaying marriage until after they have entered the labor market. Occupation has therefore become increasingly important in providing opportunities for meeting potential spouses. By bringing the school-to-work linkage literature into assortative mating research, this study illuminates the important roles of field of study and school-to-work linkages in shaping occupational homogamy among college graduates. We analyze 41,220 college-educated newly-wed men and women from the 2009–2018 American Community Surveys. Multilevel logistic regressions show that occupational homogamy is more likely to occur among college-graduated men and women if they share the same vocational-specific field of study as their spouse. The results suggest that vocational-specific fields of study that channel college graduates into a targeted set of occupations increase the likelihood of occupational homogamy. This study underlines the importance of the heterogeneous school-to-work linkages in shaping occupational marriage markets, assortative mating outcomes, and the contours of social closure in society.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".