MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160876634 · doi:10.47264/idea.lassij/4.1.8

Are the Millennials Getting Less Married?

2020· article· en· W3160876634 on OpenAlexaff
Khalid Khan, Seema Zubair, Sinem Derindere Köseoğlu

Bibliographic record

VenueLiberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal (LASSIJ) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationDemographyDemographic economicsGlobalizationEducational attainmentSecularizationCausality (physics)Instrumental variableRegression analysisEconomicsGeographySocioeconomicsSociologyPolitical scienceEconomic growthEconometricsStatisticsLawMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study investigates the causal link between the Millennials (ML) Population (18-37 year age) and the Marriage Rate (MR) (married population/total population) for the countries of France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom (UK) by using the bootstrap causality test. The findings suggest that ML population has a significant negative impact on MR in Italy and the Netherlands, while MR has a significant negative impact on ML population in Spain. Besides, the System Generalized Method of Moment Regression (SGMM) is conducted to release the effects of the Divorce Rate (DR), Education Attainment (EA), Globalization (GB), Social Protection (SP), Secularization (SEC), House Prices (HP), Financial Crisis (FC), and Working Population of women (WP) variables on MR and ML population. Likewise, the outcomes display that these are the leading factors of explaining ML population. Our results support the two-period model of Peters (1986), which states that MR is the combination of the economic, social, and religious elements and has important policy implications.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal (LASSIJ)Same topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207