Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Much has been made of the Millennial generation's seemingly low rates of political participation. Some argue that this generation is politically apathetic, while others suggest that Millennials have eschewed traditional politics in favor of protest as a means of political participation. Drawing on Canada's 2013 General Social Survey (Cycle 27, Social Identity), I employ an exploratory latent class analysis to determine whether the Millennial generation can be usefully categorized according to their participation in various forms of political, civic, and social movement activities. I then use binary logit regression to determine how well the biographical availability hypothesis explains Millennial politics. This research reveals that Canadian Millennials may be grouped into four categories: the politically unengaged, the politically expressive, the civically engaged, and activist. Support for the biographical availability hypothesis is mixed. As expected, students are more likely to be activists and parenthood reduces the odds of being politically expressive or an activist, but home ownership does not decrease the chances of Millennials being politically engaged and increases the chances of being civically engaged. Younger Millennials (ages 15–24) are much more likely to be politically unengaged compared to older Millennials (ages 25–34).
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.001 |
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".