MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154649724 · doi:10.1177/01979183211000286

Bridges or Barriers? The Relationship between Immigrants’ Early Labor Market Adversities and Long-term Earnings

2021· article· en· W3154649724 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tingting Zhang, Rupa Banerjee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Migration Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsImmigrationDisadvantageWageDemographic economicsEconomicsPsychological interventionLabour economicsEarnings growthMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using data from the Extended Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Canada (LSIC-IMDB), this article investigates the association between early adverse labor market experiences in the host country and immigrants’ long-term earnings. We use Growth Curve Modeling (GCM) to estimate how months of joblessness, part-time status, and occupational mismatch during the first four years in Canada relate to immigrant men’s and women’s earnings trajectories over the following 10 years. Part-time employment, we find, is negatively associated with long-term earnings trajectories for both male and female immigrants, and male immigrants who are occupationally mismatched in the medium term also face a long-term wage penalty. Months of joblessness early on, however, is associated with relatively less wage disadvantage in later years. Since immigrants’ early difficulties are associated with long-term economic scarring, it is imperative to introduce early interventions to promote rapid assimilation.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.328
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

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 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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Migration ReviewSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207